The Pleasanton general plan a guide to community resources, future trends, and long range plans.

THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
A Guide to Community Resources, Future Trends,
and Long Range Plans
Adopted
August 6, 1996
As amended by the vote of the people of Pleasanton
on November 5, 1996
PLEASANTON CITY COUNCIL PLEASANTON PLANNING COMMISSION
Ben C. Tarver, Mayor
Sharrell Michelotti, Vice Mayor
Becky Dennis
Karin Mohr
Tom P. Pic0
Harry Lutz, Chair
Debra Barker, Vice Chair
Jack Hovingh
Harold A. McGuirk
Robert A. Wright
John R. Dove, Alternate
GENERAL PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE
George Gunter, Chair
Chris Bourg, Vice Chair
Kay Ayala
Rick Bentley
Geoff Cooper
Stan Erickson
Mavonne Garrity
Martin Inderbitzen
Margot Kelly
Shelley Lapkoff
Tom Law
Nick Martinsen
Mark Sweeney
Kristi Timmings
Brenda Weak
Additional copies of rhis document, the General Plan Map, and all references cited are available at the Depanmenr
of Planning and Community Developmenr, City Hall, 200 OM Bema1 Avenue, P. 0. Box 520, Pleasanron, California.
94566- 0802; ( 51 0) 484- 8023.
GENERAL PLAN SUB- COMMITTEES
John J. Boyle
Rich Chino
Mike Dennis
Suzanne Eggers
Robert Frazier
David Glenn
Michael Goodwin
Dan Hansford
John E. Harding
Timothy 0. Harcey, Esq.
Gerald W. Hayes
Steve Jensen
Debra Barker
Bud Barlow
Judith Bettencourt
Seth Bland
Greg Burton
Jeff Colvin
John R. Dove
James J. Duncan
June A. Duncan
Ben Fernandez
Frank Berlogar
Rebecca Bruner
Joe Callahan
Robert G. Cordtz
Joseph P. Cristiano
Marilyn Dear
Sherry1 Dennis
James Dibiase
Donald W. Drollman
Patrick K. Frawley
Land Use/ Growth Sub- committee
David C. Jones
Victor L. Lund
Bill Makley
Nathan Meek
Keith L. McCoy
Joy Montgomery
John Moore
Dorene Paradiso
Larry Poggio
Peggy Purnell
Jeff Renholts
Lu L. Lothrop
CirculatiodGrowth Sub- committee
John Ferreri
Linda Garbarino
Richard Glenn
Glenn Hage
Roger Harris
Debi Keesling
Chris Kinzel
Elizabeth Kolar
Ken Konig
Shirley Lauer
HousinglGrowth Sub- committee
Kenneth Gooch
Jim Happ
Jennifer Harkins
Bonnie Krichbaum
Tom Mantor
Linda Marrone
Brian McGuire
Shirley Mcguire
Maureen Nokes
Celia J. Orona
Lynsley Rollins
Lewis Ruff
Gary Schwaegerle
Felicia Scott
Peter Shutts
Bob Smith
D. Jane Snyder
Gail Spielvogel
John Spotorno
LaVerne Spotorno
Patricia Stillman
Patricia Thomas
Peter MacDonald
Bob Nebozuk
Dennis Parker
Gerald Severin
Donald Temple
Joan Tenbrink
Ron S . Theile
Sandra Thorne
Keith Wardin
Earl Weak
Denise Parr
Robert M. Pearson
Emilie Seebach
J. Neville Shore, Jr.
David Speer
A1 Spotorno
Shirley Stewart
Ray Thompson
Irmeli Vatanen
Barbara Wake
Public Services and Facilities/ Growth Sub- Committee
Derek Allman
Charles Bell
Judy Brandes
Sue Compton
Sandra Dibiase
Larry Dingman
Dave Dotson
Jim Fields
Richard Hartman
Juanita Haugen
Gerald Hedstrom
Brad Hirst
Robert L. Hooper
Stephen Hunter
Bobby Jensen
Marcia Kernan
Larry Levin
Ann Macklin
Roger Manning
Peter C. Meier
David C. Melander
Ken Mercer
Charles E. Moxon
Tim Neal
Milam Pender
Patty Picco
Richard Sampson
Tom Treto
Robert F. Volko
David Walden
Scott Walsh
Diane Wardin
A1 Waugh
Emily Weak
Steve Webb
Sallie Wisner
' Conservation/ Open SDace/ Parks/ Environment/ GrowthS ub- committee
Jerry Andersen
Fred Bancalari
Chilli Barlow
Brian Bourg
Midge Callahan
Sharon Conniff
Nick Del Boccio
Robert DeMattei
Denise Garcia
Daniel Hadfield
Pamela Hardy- Alpert
Bob Adamson
Tom Archer
Lola Baggett
Frank C. Brandes, Jr.
AI Bronzini
David Choy
Marty Daniels
Thomas A. Edmunds
Donna Fernandez
Steve Friends
Joseph Giordano
Veronica Herrera
Lori Hollister
J. Michael Hosterman
Sue Janas
Stephen Kalthoff
Ron Kane
Kimberly Kielty
Deva Lowenthal
Lois Lutz
Judy Moxon
Economic and Fiscal Sub- committee
Yvonne Giordano
Barbara Gomez
William L. Hayford
Jennifer Hosterman
Jim Kindinger
Richard G. Kramer
Scott Latifi
Bill Lenson
Larry Lindsey
Harry F. Lutz
Pat Murray
M. Joy Norton
Michael A. Pirozzoli
Frank Pratuch
Howard G. Seebach
Wendy Sommer
Lorelei Tolvtvar
Russell Wells
Donna Wong- Adamson
Joanne Zachariades
Mike Madden
Shelby Martin
Sharrell Michelotti
James A. Pease
Dean L. Schenone
Steve Sherman
Grace Tiemeyer
William Tiemeyer
Rex Whisnand
Joan Zehnder
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
I .
I1 .
I11 .
IV .
V .
VI .
VI1 .
VI11 .
IX .
X .
XI .
XI1 .
XI11 .
XIV .
A Guide to Community Resources. Future Trends.
and Long Range Plans
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pase
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
LAND USE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
CIRCULATION ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
HOUSING ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v- 1
PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V- 1
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v1- 1
CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII- I
NOISE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII- 1
AIR QUALITY ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1x- 1
COMMUNITY CHARACTER ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X- 1
ECONOMIC AND FISCAL ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x1- 1
SUBREGIONAL PLANNING ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x11- 1
GENERAL PLAN RELATED ISSUES
INAPPLICABLE TO PLEASANTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIII- 1
CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS DOCUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x1v- 1
PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attached
1
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
I. INTRODUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
WHATISTHEGENERALPLAN? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
State Requirements and Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
Interpretation of the General Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
How To Use This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 2
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 2
LOCATION. BOUNDARIES. AND CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Regional and Subregional Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Planning Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Physical Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 4
Community Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 5
History of Planning and Development in Pleasanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
I- i
LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES
Table
Table 1- 1 Pleasanton and Bay Area Demographics .
Figures
Figure 1- 1 City of Pleasanton Planning Area
Figure 1- 2 Existing Features . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Page
1- 9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 10
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 11
I- ii
I. INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS THE GENERAL PLAN?
State Requirements and Guidelines
The General Plan is the official document
used by City decision makers and citizens to
guide the long range development of land and
the conservation of resources in Pleasanton.
Each city and county in California is required
by State law to adopt a general plan.'
General plans must contain a land use map,
policies, and supporting information adequate
for making informed decisions concerning the
future of the community. 2
The Pleasanton General Plan meets all
requirements for general plans stipulated by
State law including the seven mandatory
elements: land use, circulation, housing,
public safety, conservation, open space, and
noise. It also includes five optional elements
relating to public facilities, air quality,
community character, economic and fiscal
matters, and subregional planning.
The Plan is general and flexible enough to
allow for future change but specific enough to
guide citizens and decision makers at the
policy level. It identifies methods for
improving public facilities and services to
meet community needs and establishes a
framework within which zoning, subdivision,
and other government regulations are to be
implemented. It provides information
regarding the community, documents existing
conditions, and projects future trends. It also
Footnotes are located at the end of each chapter.
explains City policy and offers specific
programs to alleviate potential problems.
Finally, the Plan serves as a reference
document to help locate mformation from a
variety of sources.
State general plan guidelines recommend that
comprehensive general plan updates occur at
least once every five years. In addition. the
State mandates that housing elements be
updated at least once every five years. The
purpose of comprehensive general plan
updates is to re- evaluate all existing text and
map provisions, and to address possible new
areas of planning interest. Pleasanton has
customarily initiated its updates once every
five years following adoption of the previous
plan. Substantial public involvement in the
update process has always been provided.
Interpretation of the General Plan
The California courts have long described the
general plan as ' I.. . a constitution for all future
development within the city. " O'Loane v.
O'Rourke ( 1965) 231 Cal. App. 2d at p. 782.
Like the United States Constitution, the
Pleasanton General Plan is intended to evolve
in response to changing times. This evolution
occ: urs through formal amendment and
interpretation. State law provides that each
mandatory general plan element may be
amended as often as four times per year. The
City Council is the final authority for
amendment and interpretation of the Plan.
I- 1
How To Use This Document
The General Plan is intended for all members
of the community including residents,
businesses, and City officials, as well as any
other person or organization interested in the
future of the City. It is written in lay
language with technical terms defined
throughout the text and detailed technical data
referenced in supporting documents.
The Plan is divided into twelve major chapters
including this introduction and the twelve
General Plan Elements. The Conservation
and Open Space Elements are combined into
one chapter. Each Element contains two
sections. The first discusses existing and
future conditions, and the second contains City
goals, policies, and implementation programs.
The Plan also contains footnotes, shown in
parentheses, which cite source material
referenced in the text and an index of key
words which facilitates the location of specific
subjects. All source material was developed
by the City of Pleasanton Department of
Planning and Community Development, unless
otherwise noted. Major policy issues and key
words are shown in bold face type.
Information tables and figures are located at
the end of each Element. A multi- color
General Plan Map accompanies this document
and graphically depicts the land use policies
described in the text. The planned circulation
system is presented on the General Plan Map
and in the Circulation Element. A list of
General Plan issues inapplicable to Pleasanton
is included in Chapter XIII. The text of this
document is stored on a word processor at the
City Department of Planning and Community
Development to facilitate General Plan
amendments.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE
GENERAL PLAN PROCESS
The former General Plan was adopted in
1986. This Plan was based upon substantial
input by an Industrial Committee consisting of
150 members, and a Residential Committee
which consisted of 65 members. The
recommendations of both committees were
integrated into a comprehensive update
document by the City staff, subjected to
numerous public hearings, and ultimately
adopted by the City Council.
A fifteen- member General Plan Steering
Committee was appointed by the City Council
in June of 1993 to coordinate the
1996 comprehensive General Plan update. 394
The Steering Committee initiated its work by
conducting a series of nine " town meetings."
The purpose of these meetings was to solicit
input from the public regarding issues which
should be addressed in the ~ p d a t e . ~ Th ese
meetings were attended by over 300 people,
and considerable small group discussion was
recorded.
Based upon input received at the town
meetings, the Steering Committee formed six
sub- committees consisting initially of a total
of more than 200 members. Each
sub- committee was co- chaired by two or three
Steering Committee members. The purpose of
the sub- committees was to study, 6 discuss, and
formulate recommendations for updating the
General Plan. An " Assembly" consisting of
all sub- committee members was also
established to allow for joint feedback. The
six sub- committees consisted of
1. Land Use/ Growth
2. CirculatiodGrowth
3. Housing/ Growth
4. ConservatioxdOpen Space/ Parks/
5. Public Services and Facilities/ Growth
6. Economic and Fiscal/ Growth
Environment/ Growth
1- 2
More than 100 sub- committee meetings were
conducted between March and October, 1994.
The result was a series of worlung
document^.'^^
During the sub- committee recommendations
phase, the Steering Committee met regularly
in an effort to coordinate the overall planning
process. A continuous exchange of
mformation between the sub- committees took
place through the co- chairs at Steering
Committee meetings. Upon completion of the
sub- committee work, the Steering Committee
reviewed the various recommendations with
the purpose of coordinating them and
resolving p o t e n t i a l l y c o n f l i c t i n g
recommendations between sub- committees .
The City staff then revised the General Plan
based upon the Steering Committee
recommendation^.^*'^ An environmental
impact report," fiscal analysis, 12 and
alternatives report13 were also prepared for the
update by City staff and consultants. The
General Plan update was then reviewed by the
Assembly and Steering Committee prior to
review and recommendation by the Planning
Commission, and adoption by the City
Council on August 6, 1996.
LOCATION, BOUNDARIES, AND
CONTEXT
Regional and Subregional Context
Pleasanton is located within Alameda County,
one of nine Bay Area counties bordering the
San Francisco Bay. The Bay Area is one of
the largest and most diverse metropolitan
regions in the United States. As an integral
part of the Bay Area, Pleasanton is directly
affected by Bay Area economic and
developmental trends. Pleasanton's
demographics relative to Alameda County and
the Bay Area is summarized in Table 1- 1. At
the subregional level, Pleasanton is a part of
the Tri- Valley area. Also, included within
the Tri- Valley are unincorporated portions of
Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, the
Town of Danville, and the Cities of Dublin,
Livermore, and San Ramon. One of the
major challenges facing the Tri- Valley
communities is to plan and coordinate an
efficient pattern of land uses and infrastructure
which will benefit all of the affected
jurisdictions.
Planning Boundaries
The General Plan Planning Area encompasses
a 75- square mile ( 48,000- acre) area
( Figure 1- 1) within which the City designates
the future use of lands which " bear relation to
its planning. " Land uses are designated on the
General Plan Map for the entire Planning Area
even though much of this land is
unincorporated and lies within the
jurisdictional authority of Alameda County.
Figure 1- 1 also illustrates other important
boundaries within the Planning Area.
Pleasanton's Sphere- of- Influence is located
within the Planning Area. It consists of a
42.2- square mile ( 27,200- acre) area adopted
by the Alameda County Local Agency
Formation Commission ( LAFCO) and
represents " the probable ultimate physical
boundary and service area" of Pleasanton. l4
The Sphere- of- Influence contains
unincorporated lands over which Alameda
County has zoning control as well as lands
incorporated within the city limits of
Pleasanton.
The incorporated city limits of Pleasanton
include a 22.4- square mile ( 14.300- acre) area
over which Pleasanton exercises zoning
1- 3
control and police powers and provides public
services such as water, sewer, and police and
fne protection. Only those areas in which
landowners representing a majority of the
assessed value of the land who favor
incorporation may be annexed to the City.
Pleasanton's city limits may change any time
that landowners apply for, the City agrees to,
and LAFCO approves an annexation.
The General Plan Map designates an Urban
Growth Boundary ( UGB) line around the
edge of land planned for urban development at
General Plan Buildout. The line
distinguishes areas generally suitable for urban
development from areas generally suitable for
the long- term protection of natural resources,
large- lot agriculture and grazing, parks and
recreation, public health and safety,
subregionally significant wildlands, buffers
between communities, and scenic ridgeline
views. The UGB is intended to be permanent
and to define the line beyond which urban
development may not occur.
Physical Setting
The urbanized portion of the Planning Area
lies predominantly on flat land formed by
alluvial deposits from prehistoric streams
flowing through the Livermore, Amador, and
San Ramon Valleys to the Sacramento River.
Geologic activity in the area has resulted in
varying deposits of sand and gravel in the
northeastern portion of the Planning Area
which comprise a major resource for the entire
San Francisco Bay Area. Prime agricultural
soils which once supported the cultivation of
hops, barley, grapes, and livestock, have
generally been urbanized except for several
vineyards at the eastern edge of the Planning
Area and some livestock grazing on
Pleasanton Ridge and in the Southeast Hills.
Pleasanton is enclosed by hills on the west and
southeast ( Figure 1- 2). The Pleasanton and
Main Ridges to the west rise sharply above
Foothill Road to peaks of 1,500 feet, creating
a beautiful visual backdrop to the City. These
two ridges remain seismically active and
feature complex terrain, densely wooded
vegetation, and landslide prone soils. A series
of gentle to steeply sloping hills extend south
from Pleasanton into a valley containing the
San Antonio Reservoir.
History of Planning and Development in
Pleasanton
Land in the Pleasanton area was held by the
Ohlone Indians prior to the first European
contact, and it was then used in conjunction
with the Spanish missions. The first European
settlement was started by Augustin Bernal in
1850. The adobe house he built along Foothill
Road still exists today. For recreation, Bernal
trained and raced horses, a tradition continued
today at the Pleasanton Race Track within the
Alameda County Fairgrounds. Pleasanton was
gradually transformed from a stagecoach stop
in the 1850' s to a homesteading settlement
along the transcontinental railroad in the
1870' s, to a thriving agricultural center for the
production of grain, hay, and hops, well into
the twentieth century . I5
The City of Pleasanton was incorporated in
1894. By 1900, it had become home to the
Bank of Pleasanton, Pleasanton Hop
Company, Ruby Hill Vineyard, and three
hotels. In 1917, Pleasanton was chosen as the
setting for the film " Rebecca of Sunnybrook
Farm," starring Mary Pickford, and later
became the site of Phoebe Apperson Hearst's
home, " Hacienda del Pozo de Verona" at the
present site of Castlewood Country Club.
During the early 1900' s, Henry Kaiser and
others began the harvesting of sand and gravel
1- 4
deposits, an industry vital to the region’s
economy to this day.
Pleasanton’s unique amenities and geographic
setting have attracted residents and businesses
at an accelerating rate over the past century.
During the 1980’ s, the City became home to
a regional shopping mall, several large
business parks, and a mix of residential
developments. Throughout its history,
Pleasanton has successfully combined the
character of its past with the opportunities to
guarantee a prosperous future.
Community Profile
As of January 1, 1995, the City of Pleasanton
supported a population of 57,347 and
provided 31,683 jobs within its corporate
limits. Pleasanton enjoys a diverse economy
with a balanced mix of residential, retail,
office, and light manufacturing uses. The
City has the locational advantage of being
situated at the intersection of two major
freeways, generally surrounded by open space
and mineral resources, proximate to a skilled
labor force, and home to major corporate
offices, hotels, research organizations, and
public facilities. Pleasanton is a distinct
community which is physically separated from
neighboring jurisdictions by hills, freeways,
and quarry lands. It is a safe, high- profile
community with an excellent quality of life.
Its schools are among the best in the State.
Pleasanton welcomes cultural, ethnic, racial,
and economic diversity.
1- 5
DEFINITIONS
The Pleasanton General Plan is referred to
throughout this document interchangeably with
the terms the Plan, The Pleasanton Plan, and
the General Plan. The General Plan describes
existing and future conditions and establishes
City policies and implementation programs
which affect the Planning Area.
1- 6
FOOTNOTES
California Government Code Section 65300
et seq.
' California Office of Planning and
Research, General Plan Guidelines,
November 1990.
The Pleasanton Plan, Revised November 2,
1993.
* General Plan Steering Committee Charge
of Resuonsibilities and Planning Process,
September 23, 1993.
Comunitv Values and Issues Summary
Reuort, January 25, 1994.
Sub- committee background informational
reports prepared by the City of Pleasanton
included the following:
a. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate. Land
Use Background Report, March 7,
1994.
b. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate.
Circulation and Noise Report,
March 7, 1994.
c. Pleasanton General Plan Update.
Housing Background Reuort, March 3,
1994.
d. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate.
Conservation. ODen Space, Parks, and
Environmental Background Reuort,
March 15. 1994.
e.
f.
g.
h.
1.
j.
k.
1.
m.
Pleasanton General Plan Uudate,
Public Services and Facilities
Background ReDort. March 1. 1993.
Pleasanton General Plan UDdate.
Economic and Fiscal Background
Reuort, March 7, 1994.
Tri- Vallev Regional Planninq
Imulications for the General Plan
Update, March 1. 1994.
General Plan Studv Areas Small Grow
Tour, April 29, 1994.
East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART
Terminal Area Studv, August 22,
1994.
Informational Reuort Regarding the
San Francisco Water Department
Lands in Pleasanton " Preferred Plan",
March 2 1. 1994.
South Pleasanton General Plan Study,
April 27, 1994.
Vineyard Avenue Corridor General
Plan Studv, May 3, 1994.
Ouarrv Lands General Plan Studv,
May 4, 1994.
' Preliminarv List of Sub- Committee Issues
to be Addressed During the General Plan
Uudate Process, May 17, 1994.
General Plan Sub- Committee Desirabilitv
Statements, July 8, 1994.
Final General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations for Updating the
General Plan, July 5, 1995 ( including
sub- committee recommendations).
lo Final General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations for UDdating the
General Plan, July 21, 1995 ( excluding
sub- committee recommendations).
l1 1996 Pleasanton General Plan Update Final
Environmental Impact Report, May 3,
1996.
l3 Public Comments and Staff Information
and Alternatives Relating to the Final
General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations Report. February 1996.
l4 Alameda County Local Agency Formation
Commission, SDhere- of- Influence for the
Amador Valley.
l5 Pleasanton Bicentennial Heritage
Committee, A Pictorial ' History of
Pleasanton, 1976.
l2 Fiscal IrnDact Analvsis ReDort for the 1996
Pleasanton General Plan UDdate,
January 31, 1996.
1- 8
TABLE 1- 1
PLEASANTON AND BAY AREA DEMOGRAPHICS
Land Area
1995 Population
2000 Population
2005 Population
20 10 Population
1995 Employment
2000 Employment
2005 Employment
20 10 Employment
1995 Avg. Income ( 4)
2000 Avg. Income ( 4)
2005 Avg. Income ( 4)
2010 Avg. Income ( 4)
Pleasanton
22.4 sq. mi. ( 2)
57,347
66,000 ( 3)
70,500 ( 3)
75,205 ( 3)
31,863 ( 3)
40,000
47,100
55,760
69,300
73,900
78,700
86,300
~~~
Alameda Countv
1.062 sq. mi.
1,355,900
1,4 13,300
1,486,100
1,547,000
593,740
655,090
733,360
796,240
46,600
5 1,400
55,600
6 1,400
Bav Area ( 1)
7.178 sq. mi.
6,504.600
6.875,400
7,249.500
7,533,200
3,037,950
3,358,990
3,7 15,020
3,97 1.380
54,500
60,200
65,500
7 1,300
( I )
( 2) Incorporated Ciry Limits.
( 3) City of Pleasanton Department of Planning and Community Development.
( 4) Mean household income in 1990 constant dollars.
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Proiections- 94, December 1993.
Nine counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, Mann, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano,
and Sonom.
1- 9
r
tn
c
L
4
w
-
>
w
W
a
n
a L
a
z
- . +
tn
W
I
f-a
=>
0
tn
i t a
K
Lu
- r
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
11. LAND USE ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
Industrial. Commercial. and Office Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 2
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 2
Open Space Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3
GENERAL PLAN LAND USES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3
Residential Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 5
Industrial. Commercial. and Offices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 5
Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 6
Specific Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 6
URBANGROWTHBOUNDARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
Pleasanton Ridgelands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
South Pleasanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 8
Vineyard Avenue Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 9
Downtown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 9
Busch Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
Sand and Gravel Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
HOLDING CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
11- 1 1
11- 1 1
Population and Employment Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Annexation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 12
Commercial. Business Park. and Industrial Land Use Redesignations
THE RELATIONSHIP OF JOBS AND HOUSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 12
LAND USE GOALS. POLICIES. AND PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 14
11- i
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables
Table 11- 1
Table 11- 2
Table 11- 3
?‘ able 11- 4
Table 11- 5
Table 11- 6
Table 11- 7
Table 11- 8
Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 23
Commercial. Office. and Industrial Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 24
Employment Density Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 25
General Plan Densities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 26
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 27
Schools. Capacities and Enrollments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 28
Neighborhood. Community. and Regional Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 29
General Plan Acreage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3 1
Figure 11- 1 Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 32
Figure 11- 4 School Facilities and Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 35
Figure 11- 6 Specific Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 37
Figure 11- 2 Commercial/ Office/ Industrial Complexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 33
Figure 11- 3 Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 34
Figure 11- 5 Neighborhood. Community. and Regional Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 36
The General Plan Map depicts the land uses referenced in the Land Use EIement .
11- ii
11. LAND USE ELEMENT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Land Use Element is to
provide policies and a land use map indicating
the planned location, amount, and intensity of
residential, commercial, and industrial lands,
as well as to provide guidance for public and
open space lands. The policies need to be
considered together with the General Plan
Map to understand the City’s intentions for
future development and conservation. The
General Plan Map implements the policies
contained throughout the Pleasanton Plan in
graphic form. It is intended to serve as an
illustration of the City’s plan for a desirable
pattern of land use throughout the Planning
Area.
EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
Pleasanton is well on its way to achieving its
goal of a well- planned and complete
community at General Plan buildout. The
following summarizes the existing community
conditions and future plans for the various
land uses within the Planning Area.
Residential Neighborhoods
The reason many newcomers cite for locating
in Pleasanton is its attractive and well- planned
neighborhoods. Pleasanton currently contains
many residential neighborhoods ( Table 11- 1
and Figure 11- 1) which offer a variety of
environments and lifestyles. The oldest is in
the Downtown which features buildings dating
back to the 1860’ s.
A major aspect of Pleasanton’s neighborhood
environment is the separation between
residential and non- residential uses. In
general, major business parks, regional
shopping, quarry operations. and freeways are
located at the periphery of the City, while
housing tends to be more centrally located.
This land use pattern minimizes
incompatibility among land uses and results in
the safe and attractive environment which
makes Pleasanton’s neighborhoods so livable.
The City’s street network features relatively
few major arterials, thus minimizing the
number of residents exposed to heavy traffic
and noise. Most homes front on minor
collector streets and cul- de- sacs which
meander through the community and create
quiet, safe environments. The street pattern
carves out distinct neighborhoods, each having
a diversity of uses: housing, a local park, an
elementary school, and access to retail and
community services. Most neighborhoods
have a variety of architectural styles,
substantial landscaping, street trees, sidewalks,
and bicycle paths.
As of January 1995, Pleasanton provided
21,180 housing units for approximately
57,347 residents. The housing mix included
about 13,590 detached single- family units
( 64 percent), 2,350 attached single- family
units ( 1 1 percent), and 5,240 multi- family
units ( 25 percent). The average household
size of single- family homes was 3.09
compared to 2.05 for multi- family. The
overall residential vacancy rate was very low
at 5.11 percent.
In the future, Pleasanton is projected to grow
to hold approximately 29,000 homes. This
figure assumes buildout of all residential lands
shown on the General Plan Map at average
densities ( Table 11- 4). The City’s Growth
Management Program ( see Housing Element)
currently limits annual housing growth to
750 units, or about 1,930 persons. At this
rate, Pleasanton would reach a population of
about 67,000 by the year 2000 and achieve a
buildout population of 74,500 in the Planning
Area around the year 2004 or later. These
projections depend on many factors including
the national and local economies, Tri- Valley
job growth, household size, average vacancy
rate, commute patterns, water supply,
wastewater treatment capacity, traffic capacity,
air quality, etc.
Industrial, Commercial, and Office
Development
Prior to 1980, Pleasanton was predominantly
a residential community with limited
employment opportunities. Since 1980, the
City has seen the development of a regional
shopping mall, seven major business parks,
five major hotels, and a variety of retail,
office, and service centers ( Table 11- 2 and
Figure 11- 2). Pleasanton’s economy supports
both basic industries, such as sand and gravel
harvesting, which export their products out of
the community, and non- basic industries, such
as local shops and services, which mainly
serve people within the community. All
industries are subject to strict standards
relating to traffic, air quality, noise, water,
sewer, and hazardous waste, and are
monitored by the City.
As of 1995, Pleasanton contained about
3,000 businesses ( excluding home
occupations) which together employed about
31,863 full and part time workers.
Approximately 21 percent of these workers
lived in Pleasanton, another 29 percent lived
elsewhere in the Tri- Valley, and the remaining
50 percent commuted from the greater
outlying area.’ The location of people’s place
of work compared with their place of
residence plays a crucial role in traffic
patterns, commuting time, energy
consumption, noise, and air pollution.
In the future, Pleasanton is projected to grow
to support an employment base of about
68,254 workers, assuming buildout of all
employment- generating lands shown on the
General Plan Map at average densities
( Tables 11- 3 and 11- 4). These workers will
represent a wide range of professional,
managerial, clerical, service, and other jobs in
a variety of industries.
Employment is expected to grow at an average
rate of about 1,520 jobs per year over the next
ten years. At this rate of employment
growth, Pleasanton will reach an employment
base of 47,100 by the year 2005. Buildout of
all employment uses should occur around the
year 20 18.
Community Facilities
One of Pleasanton’s distinguishing
characteristics is the provision of community
facilities. Almost every neighborhood
features a school and a park within walking
distance of its residents. In addition,
Pleasanton offers several large facilities which
serve the entire community such as the County
Fairgrounds, Pleasanton Sports Park, Century
House, Senior Center, and the Civic Center.
Many neighborhood and community- wide
facilities serve multiple functions in meeting
recreational, social, and cultural needs.
Meeting rooms are available at City Hall, the
Senior Center, and hotels; recreational
activities take place in school playgrounds and
gymnasiums; educational and social programs
11- 2
are offered at churches and City buildings.
The Pleasanton Department of Parks and
Community Services sponsors recreational,
educational, human service, and cultural
programs in these facilities which are enjoyed
by thousands of residents, year round.
Pleasanton's public facilities are continuously
being expanded to accommodate its growing
population and employment base. For
example, the City recently constructed a new
library, corporation yard, senior center, two
gymnasiums, and parks. A list of existing
community facilities is contained in
Tables 11- 5 and 11- 6 and illustrated in
Figures 11- 3 and 11- 4.
In the future, the City will need not only to
expand upon some of its existing facilities, but
also to add a greater variety of facilities to
serve its population. Facilities which may be
required in the future include a new City Hall,
additional community parks, community
centers, municipal golf course, convention
center, cultural arts facility, and municipal arts
center.
Open Space Areas
Pleasanton is blessed with an abundance of
open space. The developed areas of the valley
floor are surrounded by generally undeveloped
land on Pleasanton Ridge and the Southeast
Hills, in the sand and gravel quarry areas,
and in the vineyards in the South Livermore
Valley area. In addition, the City is
interspersed with numerous neighborhood,
community, and regional parks as shown in
Table 11- 7 and Figure 11- 5.
Pleasanton acquires and improves many of its
parks through its Park Dedication Ordinance.
This Ordinance enables the City to collect land
or " in- lieu fees" as a condition of approving
development projects. Many of the Cip's
neighborhood parks were acquired and
developed using this technique. In addition io
these. the Pleasanton Sports Park was acquired
through an agreement with the U. S.
Department of the Interior. Shadow Cliffs
Recreational Area was acquired and is
operated by the East Bay Regional Parks
District through property taxes used to
purchase reclaimed sand and gravel pits. The
Augustin Bernal Park in the Pleasanton
Ridgelands was acquired by the City through
a donation by Walter C. Johnson. Veterans
Plaza was acquired through outright purchase
by the City.
In the future, the City will need additional
park sites and open space in the areas of
Pleasanton Ridge, Southeast Hills. El Charro
Road, Busch Road, San Francisco Water
Department Bernal Avenue site, Vineyard
Avenue Corridor area, and other areas shown
on the General Plan Map. The acquisition and
improvement of future community parks will
require means other than simply the Park
Dedication Ordinance. such as possible
outright public acquisition, developer
contributions, governmental agreements,
regional park funds, private donations, and
other means. In addition, the City will
continue to require the provision of private
open space within residential developments to
serve the needs of neighborhood residents.
GENERAL PLAN LAND USES
The General Plan establishes fourteen land
use categories with which development must
be consistent. The General Plan Map
illustrates the general location where these
uses are allowed within the Planning Area.
All proposed projects must conform to the
land use designation( s) shown on the General
11- 3
Plan Map. Those which do not must receive
a General Plan Amendment to an appropriate
designation by the City Council in order to
develop a different use. Amendments to each
General Plan Element are allowed up to four
times per year, as per State law. The only
exception to this rule is land within the
Pleasanton Ridgelands area, which is subject
to a vote of the Pleasanton citizenry for any
General Plan Map amendment.
The City's Zoning Ordinance further defines
land use types and densities, building height,
parking, and other requirements of
development. Zoning designations must be
consistent with the General Plan Map. Zoning
designations include a specific list of uses
allowed within a particular zone. These
frequently include uses compatible with the
main use but different in type, such as
churches within industrial zones. The General
Plan intent is to incorporate the variety of
compatible uses which are generally allowed
by the zoning districts within each General
Plan designation. Accordingly, " permitted
and conditional" land uses allowed within the
various City zoning designations are
considered to be consistent with the
corresponding General Plan land use
categories.
Below is a general description of the land
uses allowed under the Pleasanton General
Plan. The allowable density of any zoning
designation for any individual parcel must fall
within the density range for the underlying
General Plan designation as shown on
Table 11- 4. Any use allowed within the
zoning district must also conform to the
General Plan.
When zoning individual properties, the City
shall attempt to balance development at the
upper end of the General Plan density range
with the lower end so that the average
densities shown in Table 11- 4 can be applied
city- wide. The City shall maintain a
maximum buildout of 29,000 housing units
within the Planning Area. The average
densities shown in Table 11- 4 were used to
calculate the holding capacity of the General
Plan and resulting levels of traffic, noise, and
air quality.
Residential properties which have unusual
topography, other characteristics which do not
lend themselves to development under
standard zoning, or unique features which a
developer wishes to incorporate within the site
should be zoned Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) . The maximum number
of units allowed on parcels zoned PUD shall
not exceed the maximum for the underlying
General Plan Map designation ( plus a possible
25 percent density bonus for the provision of
significant affordable housing), multiplied by
the number of gross developable acres in the
parcel. Gross Developable Acres shall
include all privately owned acreage within a
parcel and shall exclude all publicly owned
facilities ( e. g., City- owned parks, flood
control channels, and public school sites) or
such sites planned to be purchased by a public
agency. Acreage to be devoted to publicly
owned facilities dedicated as part of a project
( e. g. roadway rights- of- way, parks, and trails)
shall be included as " gross developable acres"
unless such acreage is rendered undevelopable
by other General Plan provisions. The
General Plan Map's conceptual depiction of
major arroyos as Open Space- Public Health
and Safety shall apply the Open Space
designation to the entirety of flood control
channel rights- of- way as ultimately determined
by the City. These arroyos are not to be
counted as part of residentially designated
" gross developable acres." The terrain of the
land shall be considered when land use
designations are given, so that terrain which is
not feasible for development does not get
redesignated to Low, Medium, or High
Density Residential.
Residential projects proposed for land
designated as Rural Density Residential
should be encouraged to cluster home sites on
lots of one acre or larger but may include any
housing type. Residential projects proposed
for land designated as Low and Medium
Density Residential should propose densities
generally consistent with the average densities
assumed for buildout of the General Plan, as
shown in Table 11- 4, and may include any
housing type. Low and Medium Density
projects which propose densities greater than
the average shown in Table 11- 4 should be
zoned PUD and contain sufficient public
amenities to justify for the higher density.
Examples of amenities which might qualify a
project for density bonus include the provision
of affordable housing; and dedication and/ or
improvement of parkland, open space, and/ or
trails beyond the standard requirements. Low
and Medium Density projects zoned PUD may
exceed the maximum density shown in
Table 11- 4 on portions of the site, as long as
the overall density for the entire site does not
exceed the overall maximum permitted.
Housing with increased densities on portions
of the parcel shall be sited to minimize
potential adverse impacts on adjacent,
developed properties. The maximum density
of properties designated as High Density
Residential shall be determined by the
underlying zoning designation.
Industrial, Commercial and Office projects
should generally conform to the average
densities assumed in Table 11- 4. However,
projects proposing intensities greater than the
, average assumed in Table 11- 4 may be allowed
up to the maximum indicated, provided that
sufficient amenities and mitigations are
incorporated into the project to justify the
increased density.
All projects receiving PUD approval prior to
the adoption of this comprehensive General
Plan update on August 6, 1996, shall be
deemed in conformance with the provisions of
this Plan.
Residential Areas
( See Table 11- 4)
Rural Density Residential - No more than
.2 dwelling units per gross developable
acre. Clustering of development shall be
encouraged with lots of one acre and
larger.
Low Density Residential - Less than two
dwelling units per gross developable acre.
Medium Density Residential - Between
two and eight dwelling units per gross
developable acre.
High Density Residential - Greater than
eight dwelling units per gross developable
acre.
Any housing type ( detached and attached
single- family homes, duplexes. townhouses,
condominiums, and apartments) in addition to
religious facilities, schools, day care facilities,
and other community facilities, may be
allowed in any of the residential designations
provided that all requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance are met.
Industrial, Commercial, and Offices
( See Table 11- 4)
Commercial and Offices ( Retail,
Highway, and Service Commercial;
Business and Professional Offices) -
Floor Area Ratios ( FARs) not to exceed
.6, except for hotels or motels which
should not exceed .7 and projects within
the Central Business District ( CBD) which
should not exceed 2.0. Certain uses, such
as warehouses, where employee density
and traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
General and Limited Industrial - FARs
not to exceed .5. Certain uses, such as
warehouses, where employee density and
traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
Sand and Gravel Harvesting - Land or
buildings used for the extraction of mineral
resources and related low intensity
activities such as ready- mix facilities and
asphalt batch plants. No significant
development is allowed in these areas.
Business Park ( Industrial, Commercial
and Offices) - FARs not to exceed .6.
Community Facilities
Public and Institutional - Any public or
institutional use, including religious
facilities, cemeteries, corporation yards,
sewage treatment facilities, utility
substations, hospitals, post offices,
community centers, senior centers,
libraries, and City Hall. FARs not to
exceed .6. Certain uses, such as
warehouses, where employee density and
traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
Schools - Any public or private educational
facility.
Open Space
Parks and Recreation - Neighborhood.
community, and regional parks. No
si@ icant development is allowed in these
areas.
0 Agriculture and Grazing - Land or
buildings used for the production of
agriculture or the grazing of animals. No
significant development is allowed in these
areas.
0 Public Health and Safety - Land set aside
for the protection of the public health and
safety due to geologic, topographic, fire,
or other hazards. No development is
allowed in these areas other than one
single- family home on existing lots of
record as of September 16, 1986 which
meet City requirements for access, public
safety, building site and architectural
design, etc.
Wildlands Overlay - Lands identified as
wildlife corridors and valuable plant and
wildlife habitats such as arroyos, the San
Antonio Reservoir area, highly vegetated
areas, and other natural areas necessary to
maintain significant populations of plant
and animal species. This is an " overlay"
designation which is additive to the
underlying General Plan Map designation.
No private development is allowed in these
areas other than one single- family home on
existing lots of record as of
September 16, 1986 which meet City
requirements for access, public safety,
building site and architectural design, etc.
11- 6
Specific Plan
All properties lying within the boundaries of a
Specific Plan Area are subject to the land
uses, densities, public improvements, and
other requirements specified in the Specific
Plan prepared for that area. The land uses,
densities, and street alignments shown on the
General Plan Map within these areas are
conceptual only and may change subject to the
outcome of the Specific Plan ( Figure 11- 6).
Medium and High Density Residential areas
designated on the General Plan Map with a
striping pattern are intended for the
development of both densities, to be
determined by the Specific Plan.
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
The General Plan Map designates an Urban
Growth Boundary ( UGB) line around the edge
of land planned for urban development at
General Plan buildout. The line
distinguishes areas generally suitable for urban
development and the provision of urban public
facilities and services from areas generally
suitable for the long- term protection of natural
resources, large lot agriculture and grazing,
parks and recreation, public health and safety,
subregionally significant wildlands, buffers
between communities, and scenic ridgeline
views. The UGB is intended to be permanent
and to define the line beyond which urban
development will not occur.
Lower densities should be encouraged along
the inside edge of the UGB to provide a
transitiodbuffer for preventing potential
conflicts with uses immediately beyond the
boundary such as agriculture and wildlands.
Since the UGB is considered to be permanent,
future adjustments are discouraged.
However, minor adjustments may be granted,
which meet all of the following criteria:
( 1) are otherwise consistent with the goals and
policies of the General Plan: ( 2) would nor
have a significant adverse impact on
agriculture, wildland areas, or scenic ridgeline
views; ( 3) are contiguous with existing urban
development or with property for which all
discretionary approvals for urban development
have been granted; ( 4) would not induce
further adjustments to the boundary; and
( 5:) demonstrate that the full range of urban
public facilities and services will be adequately
provided in an efficient and timely manner.
UGB locations adjacent to areas designated for
Sand and Gravel Harvesting in East
Pleasanton should be re- evaluated at such time
as comprehensive land use designation changes
are considered for the reclaimed quarry lands.
The existing Little Valley Road neighborhood
in South Pleasanton is designated as Rural
Density Residential, and located beyond the
UGB. However, since this neighborhood is
an existing partially developed area, five- acre
minimum parcel sizes may be permitted
without the provision of standard urban water
and sewer service, subject to public health and
safety considerations.
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Pleasanton Ridgelands
The Pleasanton Ridgelands area includes
approximately 13,000 acres generally bounded
by 1- 580, Palomares Road, Niles Canyon
Road, and the 670- foot elevation near Foothill
Road; excluding the existing communities of
Sunol, Kilkare Canyon, and Castlewood. Part
of the Ridgelands area is within the City of
Hayward, part within Pleasanton, and the
remainder in unincorporated area of Alameda
County.
The Ridgelands area consists of ridges and
valleys which separate the Tri- Valley area
from Castro Valley and the communities of
the East Bay Plain. It provides the primary
-
11- 7
western visual backdrop for Pleasanton and
joins the more westerly ridges in establishing
the topographic edge to Hayward and Castro
Valley. This predominantly undeveloped land
further provides an open space amenity of
regional significance. It is characterized by
steeply sloping, heavily forested eastern and
northern faces of the Pleasanton, Sunol, and
Main Ridges and broad grassland grazing
areas along ridge tops and southern and
western slopes. This scenic area also contains
substantial regional parkland, agricultural
land, and valuable wildlife habitat.
In November of 1993, Measure F was
approved by the Pleasanton voters which
directly relates to the Ridgelands. The intent
of the Measure is to preserve the remaining
agricultural open space and designate the
Ridgelands as Park and Recreation ( for
publicly- owned land) and Agriculture ( for
privately- owned land). In those areas
designated Agriculture, certain uses which
would be incompatible with the existing visual
quality are not allowed. The base density for
agricultural areas is 100 acres per building
site; and new homes may be located only on a
legal building site, must not interfere with
agricultural use in the area, and must not
interfere with documented public agency plans
to connect or create trails and open space
areas.
Measure F may not be amended as to land use
designations nor repealed except by a vote of
the citizens of Pleasanton.
South Pleasanton
South Pleasanton is characterized by rolling to
steeply sloping hills used predominantly as
grazing and watershed land, with low density
residential uses in the flat Happy Valley Area.
The General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear
Research Center dominates the largely
undeveloped Vallecitos Valley area north of
State Route 84, while the San Antonio
Reservoir watershed area, owned by the City
and County of San Francisco, covers much of
the area south of State Route 84.
The General Plan designates much of South
Pleasanton as Public Health and Safety, and
Wildlands Overlay, with no development
capacity other than a single- family home on
existing private lots of record. These
designations cover the steeper slopes, higher
elevations, areas subject to landslides and
other hazards, watershed land, and valuable
wildlife habitat and corridor areas. The
Happy Valley area that is designated as Low
Density Residential shall have a two- acre
maximum density. In determining parcel
size, consideration should be given to
surrounding parcels. Other close- in hilly
areas are designated as Rural Density
Residential to encourage the clustering of large
lot, custom homes suitable to this terrain. The
flat area located south of Happy Valley Road
is designated as Parks and Recreation for a
future municipal golf course. The General
Electric site is designated as General and
Limited Industrial, and some Rural Density
Residential is planned to the west of that
facility along Little Valley Road in an area of
existing ranchettes.
Consideration should be given to preserving
large open space acreage in South Pleasanton
by a combination of private open space and a
public park system. Trail rights- of- way and
land should be acquired by way of developer
dedications, as well as by bond measures,
corporate and personal donations, regional
State and Federal funding programs, etc.
Attempts to achieve public access to open
space areas and trails should not create
onerous impositions on property owners. In
11- 8
addition to open space and trails, an equestrian
center is also encouraged in South Pleasanton.
In the Happy Valley area, additional vehicular
use of the " Happy Valley Loop" ( Sycamore
Road, Aha1 Street. and Happy Valley Road)
is permitted to accommodate the planned
municipal golf course and the limited planned
residential development. Infrastructure
extensions to new development in this area
should be designed to accommodate
connections to existing homes having
substandard facilities.
Vinevard Avenue Corridor
The 368- acre Vineyard Avenue Corridor is
located in the southeastern portion of
Pleasanton, south of the Arroyo Del Valle and
west of Ruby Hill. Terrain is mostly flat
north of Vineyard Avenue and generally
transitions to steep slopes on the south side.
Vegetation consists mostly of oak woodlands
and grasslands in this sparsely developed area.
Due to the complexity of planning issues
raised by the Vineyard Corridor, a Specific
Plan should be prepared to coordinate land
uses, densities, aesthetics, circulation, and
lnfrastructure requirements. Future land use
designations should consist of Agriculture and
Grazing; Rural, Low, and Medium Density
Residential; Parks and Recreation; and
Commercial. Other possible uses should also
be considered which relate to the outlying
wine country, including " country" restaurants,
bed- and- breakfast inns, wineries, wine- tasting
rooms, tourist mformation, art galleries,
museums, bicycle rentals, etc. The Specific
Plan should include a target of 150 housing
units. An attractive gateway to the Livermore
Valley wine country should be accomplished
by developing Vineyard Avenue into a scenic
road entry, preserving substantial open space,
planting vineyards, and implementing a wine
country architectural and landscape design
theme throughout the Corridor.
Downtown
Downtown is the heart of Pleasanton and is
located at the center of the Planning Area. It
features the City's oldest buildings. its most
established residential neighborhoods.
tree- lined streets, and an identifiable image as
a classic early 1900' s " American Downtown. "
The Downtown has served many functions
over the past 120 years including a railroad
stop, agricultural exchange center, and
community shopping area. It contains many
of the historic features of the community
which should be preserved because of their
architectural design, historic value, and
contribution to the community character. The
challenge presented by the Downtown is to
find ways to integrate the changes needed to
serve the City's growing population and
employment base and still preserve the essence
of its small town character.
In recent years, a Specific Plan and
Downtown Revitalization Plan were adopted
by the City for the commercial area. A
variety of infrastructure, landscape, and
building improvements were subsequently
completed through a joint public/ private effort.
Similar planning and improvements for the
outlying heritage residential neighborhoods are
also needed to preserve and enhance this
unique area. This effort should analyze
specific parcel characteristics and provide
locally sensitive recommendations for
preservation and design. Mechanisms to
finance and implement the plan's
recommendations should also be established.
11- 9
Busch Property
The 9 1 - acre Busch property is located between
Mohr Avenue and Busch Road, next to the
Pleasanton Operations Service Center. The
site is flat and contains two heritage homes
and minimal tree cover. Development of this
site should be in conformance with the land
uses designated on the General Plan Map and
include a " traditional planning" design
concept; very generous front yard setbacks
along Mohr Avenue; preservation of the two
existing heritage homes with no new buildings
constructed in front of them; and at least nine
acres of parkland ( including up to three acres
of landscape improvements to the adjacent
Iron Horse Trail corridor). A maximum of
four housing units per acre should be
permitted for the Medium Density Residential
area, with a potential increase of an additional
one unit per acre for a superb " traditional
design" concept.
Sand and Gravel Harvesting
The eastern portion of the Planning Area
contains the largest deposits of sand and
gravel in the entire Bay Area. This land is of
special importance because of the value of its
mineral deposits to the region's economy, the
effects of extracting and transporting sand and
gravel on the local environment, and the
manner in which excavated land is reclaimed
for future use.
Alameda County, within whose jurisdiction the
gravel areas are mostly located, has adopted a
Reclamation Plan' which indicates the extent
of harvesting operations and identifies
potential future uses suitable for land once its
deposits have been extracted. The
Reclamation Plan calls for an open space and
recreation resource known as the Chain of
Lakes, a series of open gravel pits filled with
ground water after sand and gravel deposits
have been extracted. Shadow Cliffs
Recreational Area is an example of how these
pits can be reused, although not all of these
areas are suitable for such high- intensity
recreational use.
The quarry lands create a valuable urban
separator between Pleasanton and Livermore.
This land should be carefully studied during a
future comprehensive General Plan update,
and its qualities as an urban separator should
be substantially protected. Agriculture,
recreation, open space, and water management
should become its primary uses as opposed to
residential. The lake areas should be restored
to a safe and natural condition, and wildlife
areas should be regenerated to the fullest
extent feasible. Future re- use established by
the study should not take effect until after the
area is mined and reclaimed. The details of
future plans should be closely coordinated
with the affected property owners, City of
Livermore, Alameda County, and Zone 7.
Approximately 178 acres of reclaimed land
on the Kiewit and Kaiser Sand and Gravel
properties along Busch Road have been mined
and fully restored. The General Plan Map
now designates this land as 140 acres of
General and Limited Industrial, and 38 acres
of Parks and Recreation. If the park site is
ultimately not needed for park purposes, then
it should be redesignated as General and
Limited Industrial.
HOLDING CAPACITY
Holding Capacity is the ultimate size of the
community that can be accommodated if all
land uses shown on the General Plan Map
were to be built. Capacity is expressed in
terms of housing units, population,
11- 10
commercial/ office/ industrial building floor
area, and jobs at buildout.
If all residential land shown on the General
Plan Map were built out, Pleasanton would
contain approxmately 29,000 housmg umts
which would support a residential population
of about 74,500. This holding capacity
estimate assumes that residential land uses are
built to average densities ( Table 11- 4), vacancy
rates will average three percent, and
household size will level off at 2.65 persons
per household at buildout.
If all the commercial, office, industrial, and
other employment generating land were built
out, Pleasanton would contain approximately
28,176,500 million square feet of building
floor area, enough to support about
68,254 jobs. This holding capacity estimate
assumes that employment generating uses are
built at average densities ( Table 11- 4), vacancy
rates average seven percent, and employment
densities will approximate current levels
( Table 11- 3).
Table 11- 8 summarizes the number of acres of
each land use designated within the Pleasanton
Planning Area.
Population and Employment Projections
Residential Growth in Pleasanton is
controlled by the City’s Growth Management
Program3 which will permit up to 750 housing
units per year, based upon an assessment of
infrastructure capacity and other factors.
Assuming these rates of growth, projections of
population growth can be made to buildout of
the General Plan. As shown in Figure IV- 1 of
the Housing Element, Pleasanton can be
expected to reach a population of 67,000 by
the year 2000 and reach its holding capacity of
74,500 persons within the existing Planning
Area around the year 2004 or later.
Employment growth in Pleasanton is not
directly subject to growth management
although the effects of employment growth.
such as traffic. noise, and air quality. are
monitored by the City and subject to adopted
standards. Gruen Gruen + Associates4 has
projected employment growth using a
mathematical model which takes into account
the demand for building space over time, the
amount of existing vacant building space. and
developers’ propensity to invest in industrial.
commercial, and office buildings. Figure IV- 2
of the Housing Element illustrates these
projections for Pleasanton’s share of future
employment growth and compares them with
projections prepared by ABAG. 5
Employment in Pleasanton as of 1995 was
estimated to be 31,863. By the year 2000,
Pleasanton can be expected to support a total
of 40,000 jobs, and by the year 2010,
55,800 jobs. If this rate of employment
growth were to continue, buildout of all
employment generating uses would occur
around the year 2018 and total 68.254 jobs.
Commercial, Business Park, and
Industrial Land Use Redesignations and
Development
Land which is designated for Commercial,
Business Park, or Industrial use on the
General Plan Map, and which is either
developed, has a recorded final subdivision
map, and/ or has a development agreement
with the City is considered to provide
adequate total acreage for such uses. This
land should generally retain its current
designation, and not be redesignated for
residential use, with the possible exception of
the area surrounding the East Dublid
Pleasanton BART Station. Further
commercial, business park, and industrial
development beyond that described above
should take place in infill areas and should be
11- 1 1
subject to consideration of the following:
( 1) effect upon community character;
( 2) potential infrastructure constraints, such as
water supply, sewage capacity, street capacity,
police and fire service, etc.; ( 3) potential
environmental constraints, such as air quality,
noise, etc.; ( 4) potential fiscal impacts; and
( 5) potential subregional constraints.
Annexation
The annexation of remaining parcels of
unincorporated County land to the City is
crucial to completing an efficient system of
municipal services at General Plan buildout.
The following criteria should be followed for
evaluating future annexation proposals:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The capability of public agencies which
provide services such as water, sewer,
police, fire, transportation, solid waste
disposal, parks, and schools should be
adequate or expandable to support the
proposed development.
The proposed annexation should be a
logical extension of an existing planned or
developed area.
The land should not be under an
agricultural preserve or open space
contract.
The quality of the development proposed
for the area to be annexed should enhance
the existing community.
THE RELATIONSHIP OF JOBS AND
HOUSING
The relationship between jobs and housing is
a complex and often misunderstood topic
which affects all communities especially those,
like Pleasanton, within large metropolitan
areas. Workers choose jobs and residential
locations based on a variety of personal,
financial, and locational factors, not simply on
the basis of commute time or distance.
Therefore, a certain percentage of workers
will choose to live and work within the same
community, such as Pleasanton, a certain
percentage within the same commute area,
such as the Tri- Valley, and a certain
percentage will choose to live great distances
away from their places of employment. The
essence of the jobs/ housing issue is to
recognize these different types of commute
behavior and provide adequate housing
opportunities within the commute area desired
by each group of workers.
Planning to accommodate this diversity of
commute patterns involves identifying and
providing for employment generated housing
needs on three geographic levels - the
community, the commute area, and the region
( such as the Bay Area). State law6*’
recognizes each city’s and county’s
responsibility to accommodate employment-generated
housing needs. From a practical
perspective, fulfillment of this responsibility is
a regional concern which must allow for the
locational differences and varying needs
among communities within larger commute
areas. Pleasanton’s location at the intersection
of two freeways has played an important role
in establishing the City as a major
employment center within the Tri- Valley
area. Other communities, like Danville or
Alamo, enjoy a setting more conducive to
development as primarily residential
communities.
Planning for a balance of jobs and housing
within the Tri- Valley commute area, and not
necessarily within each jurisdiction, allows
each community to best use its own resources
11- 12
and develop its own identity, while ensuring
an adequate supply of housing within a
reasonable commuting distance of Tri- Valley
jobs. Pleasanton has adopted this area- wide
approach to the jobs/ housing issue and has
taken significant steps to contribute its share
of Tri- Valley housing while retaining its role
as an employment center.
The General Plan provides for the varied
housing needs of people who live and work in
the community by designating a wide range of
residential densities and adopting policies
aimed at all economic segments of the
community. The designation of high density
residential land within and adjacent to business
parks is a notable example of the City’s
efforts.
Pleasanton also provides jobs in large business
parks for people wishing to live within other
communities. The designation of land for
business park use in locations convenient to
freeways, arterials, and transit corridors in
North Pleasanton is a good example.
The City also provides a wide range of
housing opportunities for people who choose
to commute out of Pleasanton to work. The
wide range of housing types and prices
provided by the City’s distribution of Rural,
Low, Medium, and High Density housing is a
notable example.
The City’s policies to maintain its proportion
of high density housing and percentage of
rental units, and to encourage affordable
housing through its Growth Management
Program are examples of the City‘ s efforts to
help meet the affordable housing needs of
workers in Pleasanton, the Tri- Valley area.
and farther away locations. Pleasanton’s
strategy to provide housing and employment
opportunities to meet the full range of
commute behavior is the key to ensuring a
functional distribution of jobs and housing in
the Tri- Valley area.
Pleasanton has also followed the
recommendations of regional agencies and
taken steps to improve the relationship
between jobs and housing in its General Plan.
The goals, policies, and programs contained
throughout the General Plan address the City’s
role in cooperating with other jurisdictions to
provide for a functional distribution of jobs
and housing within the Tri- Valley while
allowing the City to develop into the type of
community desired by its citizens.
Land Use Goals, Policies, and Programs
The following goals, policies. and programs in
addition to those contained in other Elements,
constitute an action program to implement the
objectives described in this Element.
11- 13
11. LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
Overall Communitv Development
Goal 1: To achieve and maintain a complete well- rounded community of desirable
neighborhoods, a strong employment base, and a variety of commurhty facilities.
Residential
Policy 1 : Preserve the character of existing residential neighborhoods.
Program 1.1 : Enforce the provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance to maintain
the character of existing residential neighborhoods.
Program 1.2: Use the City's development review procedures to minimize intrusions,
such as traffic and noise, into existing neighborhoods.
Program 1.3: Develop an ordinance which establishes the parameters for a grant of
density bonus for projects which provide substantial public amenities.
Policy 2: Develop new housing in inti11 and peripheral areas which are adjacent to existing
residential development.
Program 2.1: Zone vacant infill sites at densities to encourage development while
respecting the character of surrounding uses.
Industrial, Commercial and Office
Policy 3: Preserve the character of the Downtown while improving its retail and residential
viability and preserving the traditions of its small- town character.
Program 3.1 : Adopt a specific plan for the residential portions of the Downtown,
including provisions for housing density, preservation of small- town residential
character, architectural design compatibility, streetscape design, private open space,
parking, and other important planning considerations. The City Council should
appoint an ad hoc advisory committee to oversee preparation of the plan.
Program 3.2: Encourage the development of a Downtown activity center such as a
" town square park" or other public open space area to serve as a location for
outdoor community events.
11- 14
Program 3.3: Consider the development of a new City Hall in the commercial area
of the Downtown.
Program 3.4: Encourage second- floor apartments above first- floor commercial uses
in the Downtown.
Program 3.5: Consider bringing the historic train concept to the Downtown at no
cost to the City. Also, study other feasible uses of the Southern Pacific Railroad
right- of- way, except for vehicular circulation ( parking may be considered).
Policy 4: Ensure that neighborhood, community, and regional commercial centers provide
goods and services needed by residents and businesses of Pleasanton and its market area.
Program 4.1 :
commercial uses to support Pleasanton’s increasing business activity.
Zone sufficient land for neighborhood, community, and regional
Policy 5: Provide adequate neighborhood commercial acreage to serve the future needs of
each neighborhood at buildout.
Program 5.1 :
access to the residential neighborhoods they serve.
Locate appropriately scaled commercial centers with reasonable
Program 5.2: The City should not seek retail uses which present a high risk of
failure and could result in long- term vacancies in commercial centers.
Policy 6: Encourage industrial, commercial, and office development which is compatible
with environmental constraints in Pleasanton.
Program 6.1: Monitor the effects of commercial and industrial development on an
ongoing basis to measure compliance with City standards and conditions of
development approval.
Program 6.2: Encourage business parks and large employers to provide on- site child
care facilities.
Program 6.3: Promote the location of business services in Pleasanton to support
industrial, commercial, and office complexes.
Program 6.4: Generally discourage the redesignation of commercial, business park,
and industrial land to residential use, except for the area surrounding the East
DublidPleasanton BART Station.
Program 6.5:
between new non- residential development and areas designated for residential use.
Require non- residential projects to provide a landscape buffer
11- 15
Bav Area Rapid Transit
Policy 7: Establish a well- planned mixture of land uses around the East Dublin/ Pleasanton
BART Station.
Program 7.1: Form a citizens advisory committee and invite the City of Dublin to
participate in a study of land use alternatives, including some with housing. for the
area around the East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station.
Program 7.2: Provide flexibility for the Hacienda Business Park to transfer its
remaining 12 acres of High Density Residential development potential to the area
adjacent to the East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station.
Communitv Facilities
Policy 8: Provide a diversity of community facilities to maintain and improve service levels
for existing and future residents.
Program 8.1 : Review and condition future developments to pay their fair share of
future community facilities and sites.
Program 8.2: Cooperate with the School District to enhance the quality of
education, anticipate and construct school facilities as they become needed, and
maximize joint use of school buildings and City parks and playgrounds.
Program 8.3: Conduct a needs assessment, investigate suitable sites and develop
financing to construct a new City Hall, additional community parks, community
centers, municipal golf course, convention center, cultural arts center, municipal arts
center, and other community facilities to serve the needs of the community at buildout
of the General Plan.
Policy 9: Provide each major residential area with high quality neighborhood facilities
including a park and other amenities, and encourage the location of an elementary school.
Program 9.1: Adopt specific plans for developing large landholdings to identify
facility needs and establish development guidelines.
ODen SDace
Policy 10: Preserve open space areas for the protection of public health and safety, the
provision of recreational opportunities, use for agriculture and grazing, the production of
natural resources, the preservation of wildlands, and the physical separation of Pleasanton
from neighboring communities.
11- 16
Program 10.1: Preserve open space by way of fee purchase, conservation and scenic
easements, transfer of development rights, Williamson Act contracts, open space
zoning categories, etc.
Policy 11 : Maintain a permanent Urban Growth Boundary ( UGB) beyond which urban
development shall not be permitted.
Program 1 1.1 : Permit only non- urban uses beyond the UGB.
Program 11.2: Extend urban services only to areas within the UGB. with the
following possible exceptions for selected urban services: ( 1) areas beyond the UGB
where the public health and safety present overriding considerations; ( 2) as to water
service, areas which are within the boundaries of the former Pleasanton County
Township Water District and where the service extension is consistent with the 1967
Joint Powers Agreement between the City and the District; ( 3) on reclaimed land
which is currently designated as Sand and Gravel Harvesting in East Pleasanton when
the potential future use is non- urban.
Program 11.3: Because the UGB is considered to be permanent, future adjustments
to the UGB line location are discouraged; provided, however, minor adjustments may
be granted that meet all of the following criteria: ( 1) are otherwise consistent with
the goals and policies of the General Plan; ( 2) would not have a significant adverse
impact on agriculture, wildland areas, or scenic ridgeline views; ( 3) are contiguous
with existing urban development or with property for which all discretionary
approvals for urban development have been granted; ( 4) would not induce further
adjustments to the boundary; and ( 5) demonstrate that the full range of urban public
facilities and services will be adequately provided in an efficient and timely manner.
Program 11.4: Encourage lower intensity uses immediately inside the UGB, as
necessary, to prevent potential land use conflicts with outlying non- urban uses.
Program 11.5: The foregoing Policy 11 and Programs 11.1 through 11.4, this
Program 1 1.5, and the Urban Growth Boundary designated on the City of Pleasanton
General Plan Map adopted August 6, 1996, and as readopted by the Pleasanton
Urban Growth Boundary Initiative, shall be amended only by a vote of the people.
Policy 12: Preserve scenic hillside and ridge views of the Pleasanton, Main, and Southeast
Hills ridges.
Program 12.1 : Implement the land use and development standards of the Pleasanton
Ridgelands Initiative of 1993 ( Measure F).
Program 12.2: Study the feasibility of preserving large open space acreage in the
Southeast Hills by a combination of private open space and a public park system.
11- 17
Land Use/ TransDortation Plannino,
Policy 13: Integrate land use and transportation planning in order to ensure patterns that
facilitate safe and convenient mobility of people and goods at a reasonable cost. and to
increase travel alternatives to the single- occupant automobiles.
Program 13.1: Reduce the need for vehicular traffic by locating employment,
residential, and service activities close together, and plan development so it is easily
accessible by transit, bicycle, and on foot.
Program 13.2:
buildings within existing urban areas.
Encourage the reuse of vacant and underutilized parcels and
Program 13.3: Encourage transit- compatible development near BART stations,
along transportation corridors, in business parks and the Downtown. and at other
activity centers to create effective destinations for transit.
Program 13.4: Promote pedestrian- oriented mixed- use centers, including
residential, commercial, and employment activities, easily accessible by foot, bicycle,
or transit.
Program 13.5: Permit higher residential and commercial densities in the proximity
of transportation corridors.
Program 13.6: Assure that new major commercial, office, and institutional centers
are adequately served by transit.
Program 13.7: Use design features in new development and redeveloped areas to
encourage transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access, such as connections between
activity centers and residential areas, and road design that accommodates transit
vehicles.
Program 13.8:
residential areas.
Encourage employment and neighborhood shopping in or near
Program 13.9: Encourage small- scale neighborhood telecommuting centers and the
infrastructure needed to support them in or near residential areas to enable residents
to work close to home.
Growth Management
Goal 2: To develop in an efficient, logical, and orderly fashion.
Policy 14: Regulate the number of housing units approved each year to adequately plan for
infrastructure and assure City residents of a predictable growth rate.
11- 18
Program 14.1: Use the City’s Growth Management Program to limit residential
growth to between 0 and 650 housing units per year, and reserve an additional
100 units per year for projects which include 25 percent or more lower- income
housing units. The annual allocation should be based on a periodic assessment of
housing need, employment growth, the availability of mfrasmcture. and the City’s
ability to provide public services.
Program 14.2: Prepare a “ Growth Management” report on which the City Council
can base its annual Growth Managemenr allocations.
Program 14.3: Monitor the effects of residential development, using the City’s
Growth Management Report, on an ongoing basis to measure compliance with City
standards and conditions of development approval.
Program 14.4: Undertake a study to determine if the maximum number of housing
units which may be constructed on an annual basis could be reduced taking into
account the following: a description of Pleasanton’s appropriate share of the regional
need for housing; a description of the specific housing programs and activities being
undertaken by Pleasanton to fulfill the requirements of Government Code $ 65302; a
description of whether and how the public health, safety, and welfare would be
promoted by reducing the number; the environmental and fiscal resources available
to Pleasanton, including the impact of State policies on the City’s budget and the
ability of the City in the future to provide adequate staff and services commensurate
with the staff and services available today; the assessment of Pleasanton’s housing
needs, employment growth, the availability of infrastructure, and the ability to
provide public services; the deteriorating traffic conditions on Interstates 680 and 580
and Pleasanton’s contributions to these conditions; the impact development has on
schools; and the certainty that mfrastructure will be in place when it is needed.
Policy 15: Maintain a maximum housing buildout of 29,000 housing units within the
Planning Area.
Program 15.1 : Monitor and zone future residential developments so as not to exceed
the maximum housing buildout.
Program 15.2: The foregoing Policy 15 and Program 15.1, and this Program 15.2,
shall be amended only by a vote of the people.
Policy 16: Annex urbanized pockets of unincorporated land adjacent to the city limits in
areas where landowners are willing to accept City services and development standards.
Program 16.1 : Explore methods of annexing the remaining unincorporated pockets
of urbanized land.
11- 19
Policy 17: Encourage development in locations which would complete or install planned
public facility systems.
Program 17.1: Use the Growth Management Program to select for early
development projects which complete and/ or install critical portions of the City’s
planned public facility systems.
Program 17.2: Invest in public facilities and amenities that support the infd of
development.
Program 17.3: Assure that services to existing developed areas are maintained at an
acceptable level when new development occurs.
Citizen Particbation
Goal 3: To encourage the participation of residents, businesses, and neighboring jurisdictions
in planning for community development.
Policy 18: Encourage the participation of Pleasanton residents and businesses in land use
planning and decision- making.
Program 18.1: Involve citizen committees in the formulation of City plans and
programs such as the Specific Plan for the Downtown residential area.
Program 18.2: Disseminate information regarding City policies and services to
Pleasanton residents and businesses through the use of information brochures, public
meetings, and cooperation with the media.
Policy 19: Review and update the Pleasanton General Plan as conditions change.
Program 19.1 : Conduct a review of General Plan Elements, policies and land uses
by public officials and citizens, including all economic segments of the community,
every five years.
11- 20
DEFINITIONS
Central Business District - The Downtown
commercial area which is bounded by First
Street, Stanley Boulevard, the Arroyo del
Valle, Peters Avenue, and Bernal Avenue.
Community Facilities - Schools, libraries,
senior centers. corporation yards, recreation
facilities, parks, City Hall and other civic
buildings, utility plants, religious facilities,
cemeteries, hospitals, and other similar
facilities.
Community Park - A park which serves the
entire community. It may provide parking
areas, restrooms, and facilities for community
activities, and may be scheduled for group
use. Such parks may have a specific focus
such as sports fields, tennis courts, or a
swimming pool.
Downtown - The older residential and
commercial areas bounded by Second Street,
Stanley Boulevard, the Arroyo del Valle, Fair
Street, Rose Avenue, Pleasanton Avenue, and
Bernal Avenue ( Figure 1- 3).
Existing Land Uses - Those currently
developed.
Holding Capacity of the General Plan - The
maximum number of housing units and
building square footage that could be
accommodated if all land uses shown on the
General Plan Map were built at average
densities.
Land Use - A specific utilization of land,
water, or air space ( e. g., housing, retail
commercial, or agriculture).
Neighborhood Park - A park which serves
primarily the neighborhood and provides play
areas for children, open fields for casual play.
and may provide casual use picnic areas.
Open Space - Any land or water which is
used for the preservation of natural resources.
promotion of outdoor recreation, production of
agriculture, protection of the public health and
safety, or preservation of wildlands.
Planned Land Uses - Those allowed by the
General Plan ( see Map) and Zoning
Ordinance.
Regional Park - A large area of land and/ or
water which provides amenities to serve a
regional area.
Slope - The ratio of the rise over the run of a
segment of land, where a vertical line would
have an infinite slope. For example, a vertical
rise of one foot over a horizontal run of one
foot ( equal to a 45- degree angle), has a slope
of 100 percent.
Specific Plan - A set of land use, density,
transportation, public facility, and open space
standards which clarify the application of
General Plan policies for a particular area.
Urban development - Development that
requires public water and sewer service, as
opposed to rural development which does not.
Zoning Ordinance - Divides a city into
districts within which only specific uses
( e. g., single- family homes or offices) are
allowed under certain conditions ( e. g., height
limits, parking requirements, etc.).
11- 2 1
FOOTNOTES
City of Pleasanton, Results of the 1995 4
TransDortation Survey and 1994
TransDortation Svstems Management
Program, August 15, 1995.
Alameda County, SDecific Plan for the
Livermore- Amador Valley Ou arry Area
Reclamation, November 198 1.
5
6
City of Pleasanton, MuniciDd Code. Title
17. ChaDter 17.36. Growth Management
Program, as amended.
7
Gruen Gruen + Associates, Proiections of
EmDlovment and Household Growth in the
Tri- Vallev Subregion, July 1985.
Association of Bay Area Governments,
Proiections 94, December 1993.
State of California, Government Code,
Section 65913.1.
State of California, Government Code,
Section 65583, et. seq.
11- 22
TABLE II- 1
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
Subarea
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Neighborhood
Canyon Creek
Canyon Meadows
West of Foothill
Highland Oaks
Stoneridge
Oak Hill
Foothill Farms
Foothill Knolls
Laguna Oaks
Foothill Place
Laguna Vista
Deer Oaks/ Twelve Oaks
Longview
Golden Eagle Farms
Castlewood
Oak Tree Farms
Oak Tree Acres
Val Vista
Valley Trails
Country Fair
Del Prado
Parkside
Siena
Valencia
AmberwoodNood Meadows
Willow West
Birdland
Pleasanton Valley
Downtown
Civic Square
Ridgeview Commons
California Somerset
Pleasanton Meadows
Hacienda Gardens
Subarea
35
36
37
38
39
40
411
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
5s
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Neighborhood
Las Positas Garden Homes
Verona
Belvedere
Gatewood
Stoneridge Park
Stoneridge Orchards
Mohr- Manin
Mohr Park
Pleasanton Village
Sycamore Place
Rosewood
Heritage Valley
Danbury Park
Amador Estates
Jensen Tract
California Reflections
Vintage Hills
Remen Tract
Vineyard Avenue
Foxbrough Estates
Grey Eagle Estates
Ruby Hill
Pleasanton Heights
Old Towne
Kottinger Ranch
Bonde Ranch
Mission Hill
Mission Park
Lund Ranch
North Sycamore
Rosepointe
Carriage Gardens
Happy Valley
Southeast Pleasanton
& e: See Figure 11- 1 for neighborhood locations.
11- 23
.2E.
3 es .
e m
E3 " 3
00
00
W
h)
00
m4
VI
00
L-e
s 9
W
L-
00
t\ mo
P
W
9 E
s ae c
c
CD
a
7 i
0 ch
0
CD
3
F U
r
z
ca2
I", a.
E
I.
00
P CD
1 2.
E z SL
m
\ o
P
VI
h)
L
e
W
00
L
R h)
e
w
a
E
2
z
%
5.
CD
W
C
3
3
P 8
8.
E
0
" r
0
CD
3
VI
W
P
W
P
VI
W
P
W
P
- h)
E 2
CD
Y
W E
a
8
a
I.
0) :
7
5-
CD P 8
c.
E
c
Ea?
a.
E
3
00
3 c1
5
2
0
CD
t3
00
4
4
h)
N
00
W
0
h) z
- L
<
E
W
- Q
5.
8 rA
2 1
F?
r.
P
aJ
a.
0
w
6
W
I
" r
0
CD
3
4
00
00
h) m W
00
VI
W
W m W
L
0
5!
9
E
:
CD
I
a.
E.
a
r
Gz*
Ea7
C
I", aE.
h) 0
P
L-L
L
" E
L
L
L
\ o
w a
5.
5a . >
0
W a
1
CD
W
P 8
P.
E
F
8
$
P
N
\ o
4
P
L
P
h) W
P
2
m
z P.
CD
3 a
p'
W
3
cn
E.
8
s 2
0 ch
0
CD
3
F U
r. 00 a-
3
C
c - a
I",
E.
- 1.
8 P
- 0.
E
P
00 " E
0
00
VI
00
e " 5
P
00 W
4
v,
3
E'
2
%
2
9
CD
2
0
" r
0
CD
3
g U
c
z
aJ C
'", a.
E
00
P CD
1 c.
E
P
P
0
m 2
e
L
4
VI
VI 2
o\
E
E
2
CD
W
0
3
a :
0
" r
0
CD
3
g U
c
aJ
a.
E
00 a- c
6
P 8
c.
E
v,
P
00
W
h) m
m m 4
E
VI
2
3
s
E
z.
3
3
CD
1 c
a0-
3
U
CD
F
$
U
<
E
c
z
a2
a.
E
= r
0
CD
00
6
2 SL
e a W
m
VI
e
L-W
00
4
00
00 W
P
0
3
9
ii:
0
09
CD
3
s 0
1
E W
N
01
0 ch
0
CD
3
F I", E
2
2
W
\ o
0
m
W
4
L
c
00
VI
h)
P
"
L-e
s2
cn
I i?
r% n
3
0
CD
0 ch
0
CD
3
e cn
0
0 8
e
VI
0
0 8
11- 24
TABLE II- 3
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY STANDARDS
WorkDlace TvDe
Office
Research & Development
Light Manufacturing
Warehouse/ Service Industrial
Service Commercial
Retail
Restaurant
Hotel/ Motel
Average Square Feet
Per Emdovee
260
360
590
5 90
490
5 10
170
1,060
Source: Gruen Gruen + Associates, Emulovment Densities bv Tvue of Worblace, July 1985.
11- 25
TABLE 11- 4
GENERAL PLAN DENSITIES
Land Use
Designation
Rural Density
Residential
Low Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Commercial/
Office
General & Limited
Industrial
Business Park
Sand and Gravel
Harvesting
Allowable
Densitv RanPe
0- 2 d. u./ acre
0- 2 d. u./ acre
2- 8 d. u./ acre
8+ d. u./ acre
0- 60% F. A. R.
0- 5095 F. A. R.
0- 60% F. A. R.
0
Average Density
Used for Calculating
Holding CaDacitv
.2 d. u./ acre
1 . O d. u./ acre
5.0 d. u./ acre
15.0 d. u./ acre
35% F. A. R.
31% F. A. R.
32% F. A. R.
0
11- 26
TABLE II- 5
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Map #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Name and Address of Facilitv
Adult Education/ Amador Hs - 4665 Bernal Avenue
Alameda County Health Department - 3730 Hopyard Road
Amador High School Tennis Courts - 1155 Santa Rita Road
Amador Recreation Center - 4455 Black Avenue
Amador Theater - 1155 Santa Rita Road
Century House - 2041 Santa Rita Road
City Operations Service Center - 3333 Busch Road
Community Clubhouse/ Amador Park - 4455 Black Avenue
County Fairgrounds - 4501 Pleasanton Avenue
Cultural Arts Center - 4477 Black Avenue
Department of Motor Vehicles - 6300 W. Las Positas Boulevard
DublinISan Ramon Sewage Plant - 7399 Johnson Drive
Fairlands Park Tennis Courts - West Las Positas Boulevard/ Gulfstream Street
Fieldhouse - 5800 Parkside Drive
Fire Station 1 - 4444 Railroad Avenue
Fire Station 2 - 6300 Stoneridge Mall Road
Fire Station 3 - 3200 Santa Rita Road
Harvest Park Middle School Gymnasium - 4900 Valley Avenue
Historical Society Museum - 603 Main Street
Library - 400 Old Bernal Avenue
Livermore- Amador Valley Wastewater Management Agency - 7 176 Johnson Drive
Memorial Gardens/ St. Augustine Cemetery - Sunol Boulevard
Muinvood Park Tennis Courts 4701 Muirwood Drive
Pleasanton Aquatic CentedAmador Park - 4455 Black Avenue
Pleasanton City Hall - Civic Center - 200 Old Bernal Avenue, 123 Main Street
Pleasanton Middle School Gymnasiums - 5001 Case Avenue
Pleasanton School Tennis Courts - 4750 First Street
Police Department - 4833 Bernal Avenue
Post Office - 4300 Black Avenue
Pre- School " Gingerbread House" - 4333 Black Avenue
School District Office - 4665 Bernal Avenue
Pleasanton Senior Center - 5353 Sunol Boulevard
Regalia House - 4133 Regalia Court
Sewage Treatment Ponds - Near Stoneridge Drive and Johnson Drive
Tennis and Community Park - 5801 Valley Avenue
Valley Care Medical Center - 5555 West Las Positas Boulevard
Zone 7 Administration Building - 5997 Parkside Drive
&&: See Figure 11- 3 for community facility locations.
~
11- 27
TABLE II- 6
SCHOOLS, CAPACITIES AND ENROLLMENTS
1994- 95 School Year
Permanent Building
Map # Name rn CaDacity Enrollment
Pleasanton Unified School District
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Alisal
Fairlands
Valley View
Vintage Hills
Walnut Grove
Donlon
Lydiksen
Harvest Park Middle
Pleasanton Middle
Amador High
Foothill High
Village HS ( continuation)
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
6- 8
6- 8
9- 12
9- 12
9- 12
654
678
660
444
774
834
573
920
1,142
1,800
1,400
617
662
685
495
922
933
526
967
1,274
1,620
1,075
149
Future and Potential School Sites
Map # School TpDe Location Acreage
13
14
15
Elementary School Stoneridge Drive Area 5.0'
Elementary School San Francisco Water Dept. Lands 5.0'
Middle School Hacienda Business Park 19.0
I
&: See Figure 11- 4 for school faciliry and site locations.
Source: Pleasanton Unified School District.
Does not include jive- acre adjacent, shared Ciry neighborhood park.
11- 28
TABLE II- 7
NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY, AND REGIONAL PARKS
Ciw of Pleasanton Parks
Mau #' Park Name/ Address
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Augustin Bernal Park
Amador Valley Park, S . Rita RdJBlack Ave.
Bicentennial ParW2401 Santa Rita Rd.
Centennial Park/ 5353 Sun01 Blvd.
Civic ParW100 Main St.
Del Prado ParW6701 Hansen Dr.
Delucchi ParW4501 First St.
Fairlands ParkW. Las Positas Blvd.
Hansen ParW5697 Black Ave.
Harvest ParWl401 Harvest Rd.
Heatherlark ParW5700 Northway Rd.
Kottinger Park/ lOOO Kottinger Dr.
Kottinger Village/ 4100 Vineyard Ave.
McKinley Park/ 519 Kottinger Dr.
Meadowlark Park, 8200 Regency Dr.
Meadows Park/ 3201 W. Las Positas Blvd.
Mission Hills Park/ 600 Juniper0 St.
Moller ParW5500 Pleasant Hill Rd.
Muirwood Park14701 Muirwood Dr.
Nielsen ParW3800 Stoneridge Dr.
Oakhill Park/ 7600 Olive Dr.
Orloff Park/ 1800 Santa Rita Rd.
Sports and Recreation Park/ 5800 Parkside Dr.
to Gulfstream St.
Tennis and Community Park/ 5801 Valley Ave.
Sutter Gate Park/ 4801 Sutter Gate Ave.
Tawny ParkMOO Tawny Dr.
Valley Trails ParW3400 National Park Rd.
Val Vista ParW6701 Payne Dr.
Veterans Plaza/ 550 Peters Ave.
Vintage Hills Park/ 3301 Arbor Dr.
Walnut Grove ParkL51.50 Northway Rd.
Wayside Park14410 First St.
Woodthrush Park1505 1 Woodthrush Rd.
XYIE
C
C
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
N
C
N
N
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
C
N
N
C
N
Acreape
237.00
23.50
2.69
5.70
.70
5 . oo
.70
13.80
6.15
1.60
.76
14.50
4.90
5.30
4.30
5 . OO
8.50
7.00
13.90
5 . OO
3.88
8.12
105.00
15.00
2.70
3.76
6.10
10.70
.50+
4.00
3.50
.70
3.50
Functions
U
B, BP, L. P, FC. PE, RE, S. SW. T
L, T
B . BE. L. P, PC , T
BE, L, P, T
B, BB. BE, L, P, PE. T
B, BE, P, T
BP , L, PE, T , TE, S , SO
BB, P, PE, S, SO, T
L. PE
BE, L, PE , T
BP, L, P, T
BB, L, P, PC, PE, T
B, OS
B, BB, L. P, PE, T
BB, L, P, PE, T
B, BB, L, P, PE, T
BE. BP, L, P. PE. T
B, BB, L, P, PE, RE, SO, T, TE
B, BB, BE, L, P, PE, T
BP, L, PE, T
BB , BE, BP. L, PC . PE, T
B. BA, BB, BP, L, P, PE, RE.
B, L, PE, T. TE, U ( 10 Acres)
BB , L, P, PE, T
BA, BB, BE. BP. L. PE, T
B, BB. BP, L, PE. T
P, PE, T
B, L, PE, T
BP, L, P, PE, T
B, P, T
BD, L, P
BP, L, T
S, SB. SO, ST, T
- Note: Legend on following page.
11- 29
TABLE 11- 7
NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY, AND REGIONAL PARKS
( Continued)
East Bay Regional Park District Parks
Map # Park Name/ Address TvDe Acreape
34 Pleasanton Ridge Park
35 Shadow Cliffs Recreational Area
R 3,000.00+
R 249.00
Future Community Parks
Map # Park Name/ Address TvDe Acreape
36 San Francisco Water Department Bernal site, C 35.00
37 Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan site, C 29.70
38 Kaiser Property site, Busch Rd. C 38.00
Bernal Ave.
Stoneridge Dr.
39 Vineyard Corridor site, Vineyard Ave. C 20.00
Legend:
B = Barbecue
BA = Baseball
BB = Basketball
BD = Bandstand
BE = Benches
BP = Bike/ Ped Path
C = Community Park, including
F = Fishing
GL = General Location
H = Hiking
special use areas
L = Landscaping
N = Neighborhood Park
OR = Outdoor Roller Skating
OS = Open Space
P = Picnic
PB = Paddle Boats
PC = Par Course
PE = Play Equipment
R = Regional Park
RE = Restrooms
S = Soccer
Functions
os
B, BP, F, H, P, PB, SW, T, WS,
WSS, Private Boating
Functions
Undetermined
Undetermined
U ndetermined
Undetermined
SB = Snack Bar
SO = Softball
ST = Skateboard Track
SW = Swimming
T = Turf
TE = Tennis
TN = Temporary Name
WS = Water Slide
WSS = Wind Surfing School
U = Undeveloped
- Note: See Figure II- 5 for park locations.
Source: City of Pleasanton Department of Parks & Community Services.
11- 30
TABLE 11- 8
GENERAL PLAN ACREAGE
General Plan Cateporv
RESIDENTIAL
Rural Density
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
INDUSTRIAL/ COMMERCIAL/ OFFICE
Commercial and Office
General and Limited Industrial
Business Park
Sand and Gravel Harvesting
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Public and Institutional
Schools
OPEN SPACE
Parks and Recreation
Agriculture and Grazing
Public Health and Safety
Vineyard Avenue Corridor Study Area
General Plan Acreape
1,752
3.055
3,434
922
784
558
1,052
2,548
642
253
5,429
1 1,375
15,693
368
TOTAL PLANNING AREA 47,865
Wildlands Overlay 13.554
11- 3 1
s 0
11- 32
.'
L
zi
3
11- 34
' I i
:: r
5 . -
I . - .,-
0
.1
&
ea
- 0- m
/"' \
,,'
/' i'
~
11- 36
=+
L
b
0
y0.)
11- 37
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
~~
111. CIRCULATION ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Description of the Existing Roadway Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Existing Roadway Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Existing Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 2
Future Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Traffic Projection Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Future Traffic Model Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Future Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 4
Proposed Roadway Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 5
Proposed Traffic Management Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 6
Potential Problem Intersections and Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 6
Proposed Funding Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES . .
Public Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transportation Systems Management . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 8
CIRCULATION GOALS. POLICIES. AND PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 10
111- i
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Page
Table 111- 1
Table 111- 2
Table 111- 3
Table 111- 4
Table 111- 5
Table 111- 5
Table 111- 6
Table 111- 7
Table 111- 8
Desirable Level of Service Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Levels of Service for Intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Average Daily Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Volume- to- Capacity Ratios and Levels of Service . .
Peak- Hour Traffic Conditions . Interstate 580 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Peak- Hour Traffic Conditions . Interstate 680 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Critical Intersection Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Future Roadway Lane Configuration by Roadway Segment . . . . . . . . .
Current Daily Ridership of Tri- Valley Transit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . .
111- 19
111- 20
111- 2 1
111- 23
111- 25
111- 26
111- 27
111- 28
111- 30
Figure 111- 1
Figure 111- 2
Figure 111- 3
Figure 111- 4
Figure 111- 5
Figure 111- 6
Figure 111- 7
Figure 111- 8
Figure 111- 9
Existing Street Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Study Intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proposed Intersection Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Community Trails Master Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Average Daily Traffic Count Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Future Average Daily Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schedule of Roadway Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Traffic Signal Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proposed Transit System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The General Plan Map depicts the circulation system referenced in the Circulation Element .
111- 3 1
111- 32
111- 33
111- 34
111- 35
111- 36
111- 37
111- 38
111- 39
111- ii
In. CIRCULATION ELEMENT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to
provide policies and maps which indicate the
general location and extent of existing and
proposed circulation routes and facilities; to
provide a transportation system adequate to
serve the traffic projected to be generated by
the land uses shown on the General Plan Map,
as well as regional through traffic; to promote
the efficient transport of people and goods;
and to encourage the efficient use of existing
transportation facilities.
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
Pleasanton is served by an extensive roadway
network which includes freeways, arterials,
collectors and local streets. The Pleasanton
Plan uses standard classifications for its
roadway system. These classifications indicate
the type of use expected and guide in roadway
planning and design. Freeways are
characterized by their limited access and grade
separations and primarily serve long distance
trips. Arterials feed through- traffic to
freeways, provide access to adjacent land
uses, mostly at intersections, and feature
traffic control measures. Collectors provide
access to adjacent land uses and feed local
traffic to arterials. Neighborhood Collectors
provide access to residential areas and feed
traffic from local streets to arterials. Local
streets are designed to serve only adjacent
land uses in both commercial and residential
areas. Many local streets are cul- de- sacs or
serve only a limited area of homes to reduce
traffic volumes and improve safety.
Figure 111- 1 shows the existing roadways. and
Figure 111- 5 shows future additions. Typical
desirable Level of Service ( LOS) for these
types of roadways are shown in Table 111- 1.
Description of the Existing Roadway
Network
Pleasanton is served by two Interstate
Freeways and one State Route. Interstate 580
is an eight- lane freeway which runs east- west
from Interstate 5 near Tracy to Interstate 80 in
Emeryville. Interstate 680 is a six- lane
freeway, south of 1- 580, and a six- lane
freeway with additional high- occupancy
vehicle ( HOV) lanes north of 1- 580. It runs
north- south from Interstate 280 in San Jose to
Interstate 80 near Fairfield. State Route 84 is
a two- lane highway which runs from 1- 580 in
Livermore to Highway 1 near San Gregorio.
Arterials serving the Pleasanton Planning
Area include Foothill Road, Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Santa Rita Road. Main
Street, Owens Drive, Rosewood Drive,
Stoneridge Drive, West Las Positas
Boulevard, Valley Avenue, Vineyard Avenue,
Stanley Boulevard, Bernal Avenue, First
Street, and Sunol Boulevard. Pleasanton is
also served by numerous collectors and local
streets.
Existing Roadway Standards
The City of Pleasanton has adopted numerous
roadway standards and requirements to
protect the safety and welfare of its citizens.
Public streets within the city limits are
constructed and maintained to City standards.
Most City streets feature at least 12- foot wide
travel lanes, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.
Stop signs, traffic signals, pedestrian
crosswalks, and bicycle lanes are installed
where traffic conditions warrant and sufficient
rights- of- way exist. Exceptions include older
streets which were built prior to modem road
standards, areas in which rights- of- way are
insufficient for roadway improvements, or
streets for which insufficient funds exist for
improvements.
Pleasanton also has standards for controlling
traffic congestion at critical intersections
outside of the Downtown area. These Level
of Service ( LOS) standards require
developers of major projects to limit traffic
volumes to a maximum of LOS D
( Table 111- 2) at these critical intersections or
develop mitigations which will ensure that
traffic volumes meet this standard. Potential
mitigations include roadway improvements
such as street widening, traffic trip reductions
such as ridesharing, or limiting the density or
type of adjacent land uses.
The City also regulates traffic speeds and
movements and establishes parking
requirements. Traffic speed limits are
established according to roadway type,
capacity, prevailing speed, condition, and
accident rates. Moving violations are
established in the City’s Vehicle and Traffic
Code2 and are enforced by the Pleasanton
Police Department. Parking requirements
are established in the City’s Zoning
Ordinance3 and enforced by the Planning
Department when plans are reviewed for new
buildings or additions. Parking requirements
are reduced in the Downtown area to
encourage higher density uses. The Zoning
Ordinance also establishes standards for
parking lot dimensions.
Existing Traffic Conditions
Traffic volumes are measured in terms of
Average Daily Traffic ( ADT) and peak hour
volumes. Average Daily Traffic is defined as
the total number of cars passing over a
segment of roadway, in both directions. on an
average day. Peak hour traffic is defined as
the total number of cars passing over. a
roadway segment during the busiest hour of
the morning or afternoon on an average day.
In Pleasanton, the peak hours are generally
from 7: 30 A. M. to 8: 30 A. M. and from
4: 30 P. M. to 5: 30 P. M., and typically
constitute eight to twelve percent of Average
Daily Traffic ( ADT) volume, Table 111- 3.
The relative congestion of roadways is
measured by the peak hour traffic volume
divided by the capacity of the roadway
segment or intersection. The resulting ratio is
called a V/ C ratio. Levels of Service are
determined from the V/ C ratios. Table 111- 2
defines the range of Levels of Service and
describes the resulting effects on traffic
congestion.
As can be seen from Table 111- 3, the busiest
roadway segments in Pleasanton at the
present time are on the major arterials
approaching the interstate freeway system.
Nearly 79 percent of Pleasanton jobs are
performed by workers who reside outside of
Pleasanton. Conversely, approximately
75 percent of Pleasanton residents work
outside of Pleasanton. This tends to focus
trips on the arterial system going to and from
the freeways.
The quality or ease of traffic flow on a given
roadway segment is almost always defined by
the volume and capacity of the nearest arterial
intersection. In the case of Hopyard Road,
the major location of congestion along the
roadway is at the intersection of Hopyard
Road and Stoneridge Drive. Much of this
111- 2
traffic is destined either to or from the
freeway interchanges at Stoneridge Drive and
1- 680 or at Hopyard Road and 1- 580. All
intersections within Pleasanton are currently
below the City’s adopted standard of LOS D.
Only one intersection, Foothill Road and
Canyon Way, is at LOS D and then only in
the PM peak. The majority of intersections
fall within the LOS A and B range.
Future Conditions
Traffic Proiection Model
In order to forecast General Plan buildout
traffic volumes and Levels of Service, the City
of Pleasanton uses a traffic projection model
based on buildout of all the land uses shown
on the General Plan Map. The particular
system used to project traffic is the MINUTP
traffic model. This model is based on the
roadway network shown on the General Plan
Map which consists of the existing street and
highway network ( Figure 111- 1) plus future
roadway improvements ( Figure 111- 5).
Projected traffic volumes are calculated using
the total amount of housing units and
commercial/ office/ industrial building square
footage contained in the Land Use Element at
buildout of the General Plan. This
information is divided into traffic zones within
the Planning Area and translated into traffic
volumes using various trip generation rates for
different types of land use.
Traffic volumes are projected for each future
housing and square foot of new commercial
office/ industrial building floor area. These
volumes are assigned to trip destinations in
relationship to current travel patterns and
added to the existing traffic counted on the
street. Traffic volumes are then fed onto local
streets, collectors, arterials, and highways
using a formula which determines, by way of
projected uaffic speeds and travel times.
which route traffic will rake to reach a given
destination. The total of traffic generated by
new development plus existing traffic volumes
is then subjected to an mtersection capacity
analvsis. The resultant level of service is next
analyzed for rationality and practicality.
In addition to the Pleasanton Traffic Model.
the Tri- Valley Traffic Model is used to
evaluate regional traffic which includes
through- traffic that does not enter Pleasanton.
This system is an EMME2 traffic model
which was developed and is maintained by the
Tri- Valley Transportation Council. Alameda
County also uses an EMME2 traffic model for
Congestion Management Agency ( CMA)
purposes, which involve a county- wide
perspective. The Tri- Valley Model is used for
impact analysis in the Tri- Valley Area.
Future Traffic Model Runs
The City traffic model was first run to
determine traffic volumes and Levels of
Service for the 1986 General Plan land use
and roadway network. Intersections which
would exceed the City’s standard of LOS D
were identified. These are shown in
Table 111- 6.
Land use and transportation network changes
proposed by the current General Plan were
then integrated into the traffic model, and the
model was run once again. The
volume- to- capacity results are shown in
Table 111- 4. The primary roadway
improvements required to be added to the
existing roadway network are illustrated in
Figure 111- 5, and the intersection
improvements are shown in Figure 111- 7.
Assuming these improvements are made prior
to the generation of future traffic trips, all
intersections within the Planning Area will be
maintained within the City’s standard of
111- 3
LOS D except for two Downtown intersections
at Main Street and Ray StreetISaint John
Street, and Main Street and Rose Avenue/ Neal
Street. The traffic volumes and Levels of
Service resulting from buildout of all the land
uses and improvement of all the roadway
segments and intersections are discussed
below.
Future Traffic Conditions
In order to adequately plan for future
development, the General Plan roadway
network is designed to accommodate buildout
of all land within the Planning Area.
Roadways are sized, intersections are
designed, and alternative transit systems are
proposed which will enable full development
to occur within City Level of Service
standards, except in the Downtown area. The
Downtown is an exception because its historic
nature and need to preserve pedestrian
character generally prohibit the widening of
streets and the elimination of street parking.
In the future, traffic volumes will increase
substantially over existing conditions.
Table 111- 3 compares average daily traffic
volumes in 1995 with those projected for
buildout of the General Plan. As could be
expected from the large amount of business
park development, much of the projected
increases in traffic will occur on roadways in
North Pleasanton. The largest increases are
projected to occur on Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Santa Rita Road, El Charro
Road, Stoneridge Drive, and West Las Positas
Boulevard. Major arterials in other parts of
the City for which major traffic increases are
projected include Valley Avenue, Bernal
Avenue, Sunol Boulevard, and Stanley
Boulevard. In all cases, projected ADT's and
intersection levels of service were used to plan
roadway widths and intersection
improvements.
Congestion at major intersections will also
increase, although not to the point of impeding
the flow of traffic on arterials outside the
Downtown area. Figure 111- 4 illustrates the
study locations used for evaluating the street
system performance. Table 111- 4 compares
volume- to- capacity ratios at these locations
and lists the resulting Levels of Service in
1995 with those projected at General Plan
Buildout. Major declines in Levels of Service
from the current " A" and " B" levels is
expected on all arterial routes. However.
acceptable levels will be maintained except in
the Downtown area.
Traffic volumes along 1- 580 and 1- 680 will
also increase substantially from a combination
of development within Pleasanton and an even
much greater increase in traffic from outlying
areas. Freeway peak hour traffic volume and
Level of Service conditions are indicated on
Table 111- 5. Level of Service standards for
freeways have been adopted by the Alameda
County Congestion Management Agency and
the Tri- Valley Transportation Council at
Level E. Projected violations of the LOS are
shown for 1- 580 between the Hacienda Drive
interchange and the El Charro Road
interchange and between Foothill Road and
1- 680. The only LOS violation for 1- 680 is
southbound in the morning, south of the Sunol
Boulevard interchange.
Increased traffic in the Tri- Valley is
anticipated from major developments such as
Dougherty Valley, Tassajara Valley, North
Livermore, East Dublin, and smaller
developments. Year 2010 projections by the
Tri- Valley Traffic Model4 indicate near-capacity
conditions along both the 1- 580 and
1- 680 freeways even with the major planned
improvements ( i. e., the BART extension,
State Route 84 widening, high- occupancy
vehicle lanes added to 1- 580, extension of
arterial streets parallel to 1- 580 in
111- 4
Dublin/ Pleasanton/ Livermore, and the
1- 5804- 680 flyover south- to- east). These
conditions are expected to requlre ramp
metering at most freeway interchanges in the
Tri- Valley and " gateway constraints," such as
the Altamont Pass to limit the amount of
through- traffic entering the Tri- Valley.
Proposed Roadway Improvements
In order to accommodate buildout of the
General Plan, a wide range of street, highway,
and intersection improvements must be
constructed in a timely manner. Many
roadway improvements were installed prior to
development of major business parks in North
Pleasanton, resulting in the uncongested
Levels of Service in Pleasanton today.
Improvements must continue to be installed
prior to large amounts of residential and
employment growth, or congestion will result.
Figure 111- 5 illustrates roadway
improvements which need to be constructed
along critical roadway segments and at major
intersections. Existing configurations are
superimposed with needed improvements in
five- year increments. Projects approved for
or expected to have funding by Caltrans, the
City, or private developers are shown for
construction between 1995 and the year 2000.
Projects which will be needed sometime prior
to the year 2010 but which do not currently
have identified funding sources are shown for
construction from the year 2000 to 2005.
Projects which will take longer to develop or
fund are shown for the period 2005- 2010.
The policies and programs of the City support
the installation and financing of these
improvements by developers of new projects
as these are built. However, if development
is allowed to proceed in an area without these
improvements, congestion is likely to occur
beyond City standards. The City of
Pleasanton along with all jurisdictions within
the Tri- Valley are currently considering a
Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee5
to help defray the cost of needed
improvements.
Table In- 7 summarizes the roadway lane
configurations required to support full
development of the Planning Area. hlajor
road improvements which have not been
constructed include segments of El Charro
Road; Busch Road; Valley Avenue Extension:
Vallecitos Road/ State Route 84; Stoneridge
Drive Extension; Sunol Boulevard: Foothill
Road; and bridges at Bernal Avenue and
Arroyo del Valle, Bernal Avenue and Arroyo
de La Laguna, and First Street and Arroyo del
Valle.
In its original deliberations on the West Las
Positas Boulevard/ I- 680 interchange, the
1996 General Plan Steering Committee voted
to delete the interchange from the previous
General Plan Map. However, since this is a
very complex issue, the Steering Committee
subsequently voted instead to recommend that
a citizens advisory committee be appointed to
study and prepare a recommendation to the
City Council as to whether or not the City
should continue to plan for the construction of
the West Las Positas Boulevard/ I- 680
interchange. The Steering COmInittee felt that
this study should carefully examine all
potential impacts on the affected
neighborhoods, as well as on the overall
City- wide/ subregional traffic circulation
system. An economic and fiscal study should
also be included, as well as neighborhood
meetings.
111- 5
Proposed Traffic Management
Improvements
In order to make roadway improvements
effective, additional traffic mitigations should
be installed. Traffic signals, for example, are
a critical mechanism to ensure the safest and
most efficient flow of traffic. Figure III- 6
shows existing traffic signal locations and
those proposed to facilitate the free flow of
traffic at potentially congested intersections.
Traffic counts are another mechanism used by
the City to ensure that roadway improvements
are effective and traffic is flowing according
to projections. The City undertakes annual
traffic counts ( Figure 111- 2) on major arterial
and collector streets throughout the
community. Average daily traffic counts are
conducted at over 100 locations, and peak
hour turning movement counts are taken at
57 major intersections. These existing traffic
counts are then used as a basis for verifying
future traffic volumes and service levels
throughout the community. The City uses this
information to monitor traffic increases over
time and improvements in traffic flow caused
by roadway and other improvements. This
mformation also serves as the basis for
analyzing the traffic impacts of individual
development projects. The overriding purpose
of these traffic studies is to anticipate and
mitigate traffic congestion on City streets
according to adopted

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
A Guide to Community Resources, Future Trends,
and Long Range Plans
Adopted
August 6, 1996
As amended by the vote of the people of Pleasanton
on November 5, 1996
PLEASANTON CITY COUNCIL PLEASANTON PLANNING COMMISSION
Ben C. Tarver, Mayor
Sharrell Michelotti, Vice Mayor
Becky Dennis
Karin Mohr
Tom P. Pic0
Harry Lutz, Chair
Debra Barker, Vice Chair
Jack Hovingh
Harold A. McGuirk
Robert A. Wright
John R. Dove, Alternate
GENERAL PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE
George Gunter, Chair
Chris Bourg, Vice Chair
Kay Ayala
Rick Bentley
Geoff Cooper
Stan Erickson
Mavonne Garrity
Martin Inderbitzen
Margot Kelly
Shelley Lapkoff
Tom Law
Nick Martinsen
Mark Sweeney
Kristi Timmings
Brenda Weak
Additional copies of rhis document, the General Plan Map, and all references cited are available at the Depanmenr
of Planning and Community Developmenr, City Hall, 200 OM Bema1 Avenue, P. 0. Box 520, Pleasanron, California.
94566- 0802; ( 51 0) 484- 8023.
GENERAL PLAN SUB- COMMITTEES
John J. Boyle
Rich Chino
Mike Dennis
Suzanne Eggers
Robert Frazier
David Glenn
Michael Goodwin
Dan Hansford
John E. Harding
Timothy 0. Harcey, Esq.
Gerald W. Hayes
Steve Jensen
Debra Barker
Bud Barlow
Judith Bettencourt
Seth Bland
Greg Burton
Jeff Colvin
John R. Dove
James J. Duncan
June A. Duncan
Ben Fernandez
Frank Berlogar
Rebecca Bruner
Joe Callahan
Robert G. Cordtz
Joseph P. Cristiano
Marilyn Dear
Sherry1 Dennis
James Dibiase
Donald W. Drollman
Patrick K. Frawley
Land Use/ Growth Sub- committee
David C. Jones
Victor L. Lund
Bill Makley
Nathan Meek
Keith L. McCoy
Joy Montgomery
John Moore
Dorene Paradiso
Larry Poggio
Peggy Purnell
Jeff Renholts
Lu L. Lothrop
CirculatiodGrowth Sub- committee
John Ferreri
Linda Garbarino
Richard Glenn
Glenn Hage
Roger Harris
Debi Keesling
Chris Kinzel
Elizabeth Kolar
Ken Konig
Shirley Lauer
HousinglGrowth Sub- committee
Kenneth Gooch
Jim Happ
Jennifer Harkins
Bonnie Krichbaum
Tom Mantor
Linda Marrone
Brian McGuire
Shirley Mcguire
Maureen Nokes
Celia J. Orona
Lynsley Rollins
Lewis Ruff
Gary Schwaegerle
Felicia Scott
Peter Shutts
Bob Smith
D. Jane Snyder
Gail Spielvogel
John Spotorno
LaVerne Spotorno
Patricia Stillman
Patricia Thomas
Peter MacDonald
Bob Nebozuk
Dennis Parker
Gerald Severin
Donald Temple
Joan Tenbrink
Ron S . Theile
Sandra Thorne
Keith Wardin
Earl Weak
Denise Parr
Robert M. Pearson
Emilie Seebach
J. Neville Shore, Jr.
David Speer
A1 Spotorno
Shirley Stewart
Ray Thompson
Irmeli Vatanen
Barbara Wake
Public Services and Facilities/ Growth Sub- Committee
Derek Allman
Charles Bell
Judy Brandes
Sue Compton
Sandra Dibiase
Larry Dingman
Dave Dotson
Jim Fields
Richard Hartman
Juanita Haugen
Gerald Hedstrom
Brad Hirst
Robert L. Hooper
Stephen Hunter
Bobby Jensen
Marcia Kernan
Larry Levin
Ann Macklin
Roger Manning
Peter C. Meier
David C. Melander
Ken Mercer
Charles E. Moxon
Tim Neal
Milam Pender
Patty Picco
Richard Sampson
Tom Treto
Robert F. Volko
David Walden
Scott Walsh
Diane Wardin
A1 Waugh
Emily Weak
Steve Webb
Sallie Wisner
' Conservation/ Open SDace/ Parks/ Environment/ GrowthS ub- committee
Jerry Andersen
Fred Bancalari
Chilli Barlow
Brian Bourg
Midge Callahan
Sharon Conniff
Nick Del Boccio
Robert DeMattei
Denise Garcia
Daniel Hadfield
Pamela Hardy- Alpert
Bob Adamson
Tom Archer
Lola Baggett
Frank C. Brandes, Jr.
AI Bronzini
David Choy
Marty Daniels
Thomas A. Edmunds
Donna Fernandez
Steve Friends
Joseph Giordano
Veronica Herrera
Lori Hollister
J. Michael Hosterman
Sue Janas
Stephen Kalthoff
Ron Kane
Kimberly Kielty
Deva Lowenthal
Lois Lutz
Judy Moxon
Economic and Fiscal Sub- committee
Yvonne Giordano
Barbara Gomez
William L. Hayford
Jennifer Hosterman
Jim Kindinger
Richard G. Kramer
Scott Latifi
Bill Lenson
Larry Lindsey
Harry F. Lutz
Pat Murray
M. Joy Norton
Michael A. Pirozzoli
Frank Pratuch
Howard G. Seebach
Wendy Sommer
Lorelei Tolvtvar
Russell Wells
Donna Wong- Adamson
Joanne Zachariades
Mike Madden
Shelby Martin
Sharrell Michelotti
James A. Pease
Dean L. Schenone
Steve Sherman
Grace Tiemeyer
William Tiemeyer
Rex Whisnand
Joan Zehnder
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
I .
I1 .
I11 .
IV .
V .
VI .
VI1 .
VI11 .
IX .
X .
XI .
XI1 .
XI11 .
XIV .
A Guide to Community Resources. Future Trends.
and Long Range Plans
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pase
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
LAND USE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
CIRCULATION ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
HOUSING ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v- 1
PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V- 1
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v1- 1
CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII- I
NOISE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII- 1
AIR QUALITY ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1x- 1
COMMUNITY CHARACTER ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X- 1
ECONOMIC AND FISCAL ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x1- 1
SUBREGIONAL PLANNING ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x11- 1
GENERAL PLAN RELATED ISSUES
INAPPLICABLE TO PLEASANTON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIII- 1
CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS DOCUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x1v- 1
PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attached
1
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
I. INTRODUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
WHATISTHEGENERALPLAN? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
State Requirements and Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
Interpretation of the General Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 1
How To Use This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 2
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE GENERAL PLAN PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 2
LOCATION. BOUNDARIES. AND CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Regional and Subregional Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Planning Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 3
Physical Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 4
Community Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 5
History of Planning and Development in Pleasanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
I- i
LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURES
Table
Table 1- 1 Pleasanton and Bay Area Demographics .
Figures
Figure 1- 1 City of Pleasanton Planning Area
Figure 1- 2 Existing Features . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Page
1- 9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 10
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1- 11
I- ii
I. INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS THE GENERAL PLAN?
State Requirements and Guidelines
The General Plan is the official document
used by City decision makers and citizens to
guide the long range development of land and
the conservation of resources in Pleasanton.
Each city and county in California is required
by State law to adopt a general plan.'
General plans must contain a land use map,
policies, and supporting information adequate
for making informed decisions concerning the
future of the community. 2
The Pleasanton General Plan meets all
requirements for general plans stipulated by
State law including the seven mandatory
elements: land use, circulation, housing,
public safety, conservation, open space, and
noise. It also includes five optional elements
relating to public facilities, air quality,
community character, economic and fiscal
matters, and subregional planning.
The Plan is general and flexible enough to
allow for future change but specific enough to
guide citizens and decision makers at the
policy level. It identifies methods for
improving public facilities and services to
meet community needs and establishes a
framework within which zoning, subdivision,
and other government regulations are to be
implemented. It provides information
regarding the community, documents existing
conditions, and projects future trends. It also
Footnotes are located at the end of each chapter.
explains City policy and offers specific
programs to alleviate potential problems.
Finally, the Plan serves as a reference
document to help locate mformation from a
variety of sources.
State general plan guidelines recommend that
comprehensive general plan updates occur at
least once every five years. In addition. the
State mandates that housing elements be
updated at least once every five years. The
purpose of comprehensive general plan
updates is to re- evaluate all existing text and
map provisions, and to address possible new
areas of planning interest. Pleasanton has
customarily initiated its updates once every
five years following adoption of the previous
plan. Substantial public involvement in the
update process has always been provided.
Interpretation of the General Plan
The California courts have long described the
general plan as ' I.. . a constitution for all future
development within the city. " O'Loane v.
O'Rourke ( 1965) 231 Cal. App. 2d at p. 782.
Like the United States Constitution, the
Pleasanton General Plan is intended to evolve
in response to changing times. This evolution
occ: urs through formal amendment and
interpretation. State law provides that each
mandatory general plan element may be
amended as often as four times per year. The
City Council is the final authority for
amendment and interpretation of the Plan.
I- 1
How To Use This Document
The General Plan is intended for all members
of the community including residents,
businesses, and City officials, as well as any
other person or organization interested in the
future of the City. It is written in lay
language with technical terms defined
throughout the text and detailed technical data
referenced in supporting documents.
The Plan is divided into twelve major chapters
including this introduction and the twelve
General Plan Elements. The Conservation
and Open Space Elements are combined into
one chapter. Each Element contains two
sections. The first discusses existing and
future conditions, and the second contains City
goals, policies, and implementation programs.
The Plan also contains footnotes, shown in
parentheses, which cite source material
referenced in the text and an index of key
words which facilitates the location of specific
subjects. All source material was developed
by the City of Pleasanton Department of
Planning and Community Development, unless
otherwise noted. Major policy issues and key
words are shown in bold face type.
Information tables and figures are located at
the end of each Element. A multi- color
General Plan Map accompanies this document
and graphically depicts the land use policies
described in the text. The planned circulation
system is presented on the General Plan Map
and in the Circulation Element. A list of
General Plan issues inapplicable to Pleasanton
is included in Chapter XIII. The text of this
document is stored on a word processor at the
City Department of Planning and Community
Development to facilitate General Plan
amendments.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE
GENERAL PLAN PROCESS
The former General Plan was adopted in
1986. This Plan was based upon substantial
input by an Industrial Committee consisting of
150 members, and a Residential Committee
which consisted of 65 members. The
recommendations of both committees were
integrated into a comprehensive update
document by the City staff, subjected to
numerous public hearings, and ultimately
adopted by the City Council.
A fifteen- member General Plan Steering
Committee was appointed by the City Council
in June of 1993 to coordinate the
1996 comprehensive General Plan update. 394
The Steering Committee initiated its work by
conducting a series of nine " town meetings."
The purpose of these meetings was to solicit
input from the public regarding issues which
should be addressed in the ~ p d a t e . ~ Th ese
meetings were attended by over 300 people,
and considerable small group discussion was
recorded.
Based upon input received at the town
meetings, the Steering Committee formed six
sub- committees consisting initially of a total
of more than 200 members. Each
sub- committee was co- chaired by two or three
Steering Committee members. The purpose of
the sub- committees was to study, 6 discuss, and
formulate recommendations for updating the
General Plan. An " Assembly" consisting of
all sub- committee members was also
established to allow for joint feedback. The
six sub- committees consisted of
1. Land Use/ Growth
2. CirculatiodGrowth
3. Housing/ Growth
4. ConservatioxdOpen Space/ Parks/
5. Public Services and Facilities/ Growth
6. Economic and Fiscal/ Growth
Environment/ Growth
1- 2
More than 100 sub- committee meetings were
conducted between March and October, 1994.
The result was a series of worlung
document^.'^^
During the sub- committee recommendations
phase, the Steering Committee met regularly
in an effort to coordinate the overall planning
process. A continuous exchange of
mformation between the sub- committees took
place through the co- chairs at Steering
Committee meetings. Upon completion of the
sub- committee work, the Steering Committee
reviewed the various recommendations with
the purpose of coordinating them and
resolving p o t e n t i a l l y c o n f l i c t i n g
recommendations between sub- committees .
The City staff then revised the General Plan
based upon the Steering Committee
recommendation^.^*'^ An environmental
impact report," fiscal analysis, 12 and
alternatives report13 were also prepared for the
update by City staff and consultants. The
General Plan update was then reviewed by the
Assembly and Steering Committee prior to
review and recommendation by the Planning
Commission, and adoption by the City
Council on August 6, 1996.
LOCATION, BOUNDARIES, AND
CONTEXT
Regional and Subregional Context
Pleasanton is located within Alameda County,
one of nine Bay Area counties bordering the
San Francisco Bay. The Bay Area is one of
the largest and most diverse metropolitan
regions in the United States. As an integral
part of the Bay Area, Pleasanton is directly
affected by Bay Area economic and
developmental trends. Pleasanton's
demographics relative to Alameda County and
the Bay Area is summarized in Table 1- 1. At
the subregional level, Pleasanton is a part of
the Tri- Valley area. Also, included within
the Tri- Valley are unincorporated portions of
Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, the
Town of Danville, and the Cities of Dublin,
Livermore, and San Ramon. One of the
major challenges facing the Tri- Valley
communities is to plan and coordinate an
efficient pattern of land uses and infrastructure
which will benefit all of the affected
jurisdictions.
Planning Boundaries
The General Plan Planning Area encompasses
a 75- square mile ( 48,000- acre) area
( Figure 1- 1) within which the City designates
the future use of lands which " bear relation to
its planning. " Land uses are designated on the
General Plan Map for the entire Planning Area
even though much of this land is
unincorporated and lies within the
jurisdictional authority of Alameda County.
Figure 1- 1 also illustrates other important
boundaries within the Planning Area.
Pleasanton's Sphere- of- Influence is located
within the Planning Area. It consists of a
42.2- square mile ( 27,200- acre) area adopted
by the Alameda County Local Agency
Formation Commission ( LAFCO) and
represents " the probable ultimate physical
boundary and service area" of Pleasanton. l4
The Sphere- of- Influence contains
unincorporated lands over which Alameda
County has zoning control as well as lands
incorporated within the city limits of
Pleasanton.
The incorporated city limits of Pleasanton
include a 22.4- square mile ( 14.300- acre) area
over which Pleasanton exercises zoning
1- 3
control and police powers and provides public
services such as water, sewer, and police and
fne protection. Only those areas in which
landowners representing a majority of the
assessed value of the land who favor
incorporation may be annexed to the City.
Pleasanton's city limits may change any time
that landowners apply for, the City agrees to,
and LAFCO approves an annexation.
The General Plan Map designates an Urban
Growth Boundary ( UGB) line around the
edge of land planned for urban development at
General Plan Buildout. The line
distinguishes areas generally suitable for urban
development from areas generally suitable for
the long- term protection of natural resources,
large- lot agriculture and grazing, parks and
recreation, public health and safety,
subregionally significant wildlands, buffers
between communities, and scenic ridgeline
views. The UGB is intended to be permanent
and to define the line beyond which urban
development may not occur.
Physical Setting
The urbanized portion of the Planning Area
lies predominantly on flat land formed by
alluvial deposits from prehistoric streams
flowing through the Livermore, Amador, and
San Ramon Valleys to the Sacramento River.
Geologic activity in the area has resulted in
varying deposits of sand and gravel in the
northeastern portion of the Planning Area
which comprise a major resource for the entire
San Francisco Bay Area. Prime agricultural
soils which once supported the cultivation of
hops, barley, grapes, and livestock, have
generally been urbanized except for several
vineyards at the eastern edge of the Planning
Area and some livestock grazing on
Pleasanton Ridge and in the Southeast Hills.
Pleasanton is enclosed by hills on the west and
southeast ( Figure 1- 2). The Pleasanton and
Main Ridges to the west rise sharply above
Foothill Road to peaks of 1,500 feet, creating
a beautiful visual backdrop to the City. These
two ridges remain seismically active and
feature complex terrain, densely wooded
vegetation, and landslide prone soils. A series
of gentle to steeply sloping hills extend south
from Pleasanton into a valley containing the
San Antonio Reservoir.
History of Planning and Development in
Pleasanton
Land in the Pleasanton area was held by the
Ohlone Indians prior to the first European
contact, and it was then used in conjunction
with the Spanish missions. The first European
settlement was started by Augustin Bernal in
1850. The adobe house he built along Foothill
Road still exists today. For recreation, Bernal
trained and raced horses, a tradition continued
today at the Pleasanton Race Track within the
Alameda County Fairgrounds. Pleasanton was
gradually transformed from a stagecoach stop
in the 1850' s to a homesteading settlement
along the transcontinental railroad in the
1870' s, to a thriving agricultural center for the
production of grain, hay, and hops, well into
the twentieth century . I5
The City of Pleasanton was incorporated in
1894. By 1900, it had become home to the
Bank of Pleasanton, Pleasanton Hop
Company, Ruby Hill Vineyard, and three
hotels. In 1917, Pleasanton was chosen as the
setting for the film " Rebecca of Sunnybrook
Farm," starring Mary Pickford, and later
became the site of Phoebe Apperson Hearst's
home, " Hacienda del Pozo de Verona" at the
present site of Castlewood Country Club.
During the early 1900' s, Henry Kaiser and
others began the harvesting of sand and gravel
1- 4
deposits, an industry vital to the region’s
economy to this day.
Pleasanton’s unique amenities and geographic
setting have attracted residents and businesses
at an accelerating rate over the past century.
During the 1980’ s, the City became home to
a regional shopping mall, several large
business parks, and a mix of residential
developments. Throughout its history,
Pleasanton has successfully combined the
character of its past with the opportunities to
guarantee a prosperous future.
Community Profile
As of January 1, 1995, the City of Pleasanton
supported a population of 57,347 and
provided 31,683 jobs within its corporate
limits. Pleasanton enjoys a diverse economy
with a balanced mix of residential, retail,
office, and light manufacturing uses. The
City has the locational advantage of being
situated at the intersection of two major
freeways, generally surrounded by open space
and mineral resources, proximate to a skilled
labor force, and home to major corporate
offices, hotels, research organizations, and
public facilities. Pleasanton is a distinct
community which is physically separated from
neighboring jurisdictions by hills, freeways,
and quarry lands. It is a safe, high- profile
community with an excellent quality of life.
Its schools are among the best in the State.
Pleasanton welcomes cultural, ethnic, racial,
and economic diversity.
1- 5
DEFINITIONS
The Pleasanton General Plan is referred to
throughout this document interchangeably with
the terms the Plan, The Pleasanton Plan, and
the General Plan. The General Plan describes
existing and future conditions and establishes
City policies and implementation programs
which affect the Planning Area.
1- 6
FOOTNOTES
California Government Code Section 65300
et seq.
' California Office of Planning and
Research, General Plan Guidelines,
November 1990.
The Pleasanton Plan, Revised November 2,
1993.
* General Plan Steering Committee Charge
of Resuonsibilities and Planning Process,
September 23, 1993.
Comunitv Values and Issues Summary
Reuort, January 25, 1994.
Sub- committee background informational
reports prepared by the City of Pleasanton
included the following:
a. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate. Land
Use Background Report, March 7,
1994.
b. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate.
Circulation and Noise Report,
March 7, 1994.
c. Pleasanton General Plan Update.
Housing Background Reuort, March 3,
1994.
d. Pleasanton General Plan Uudate.
Conservation. ODen Space, Parks, and
Environmental Background Reuort,
March 15. 1994.
e.
f.
g.
h.
1.
j.
k.
1.
m.
Pleasanton General Plan Uudate,
Public Services and Facilities
Background ReDort. March 1. 1993.
Pleasanton General Plan UDdate.
Economic and Fiscal Background
Reuort, March 7, 1994.
Tri- Vallev Regional Planninq
Imulications for the General Plan
Update, March 1. 1994.
General Plan Studv Areas Small Grow
Tour, April 29, 1994.
East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART
Terminal Area Studv, August 22,
1994.
Informational Reuort Regarding the
San Francisco Water Department
Lands in Pleasanton " Preferred Plan",
March 2 1. 1994.
South Pleasanton General Plan Study,
April 27, 1994.
Vineyard Avenue Corridor General
Plan Studv, May 3, 1994.
Ouarrv Lands General Plan Studv,
May 4, 1994.
' Preliminarv List of Sub- Committee Issues
to be Addressed During the General Plan
Uudate Process, May 17, 1994.
General Plan Sub- Committee Desirabilitv
Statements, July 8, 1994.
Final General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations for Updating the
General Plan, July 5, 1995 ( including
sub- committee recommendations).
lo Final General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations for UDdating the
General Plan, July 21, 1995 ( excluding
sub- committee recommendations).
l1 1996 Pleasanton General Plan Update Final
Environmental Impact Report, May 3,
1996.
l3 Public Comments and Staff Information
and Alternatives Relating to the Final
General Plan Steering Committee
Recommendations Report. February 1996.
l4 Alameda County Local Agency Formation
Commission, SDhere- of- Influence for the
Amador Valley.
l5 Pleasanton Bicentennial Heritage
Committee, A Pictorial ' History of
Pleasanton, 1976.
l2 Fiscal IrnDact Analvsis ReDort for the 1996
Pleasanton General Plan UDdate,
January 31, 1996.
1- 8
TABLE 1- 1
PLEASANTON AND BAY AREA DEMOGRAPHICS
Land Area
1995 Population
2000 Population
2005 Population
20 10 Population
1995 Employment
2000 Employment
2005 Employment
20 10 Employment
1995 Avg. Income ( 4)
2000 Avg. Income ( 4)
2005 Avg. Income ( 4)
2010 Avg. Income ( 4)
Pleasanton
22.4 sq. mi. ( 2)
57,347
66,000 ( 3)
70,500 ( 3)
75,205 ( 3)
31,863 ( 3)
40,000
47,100
55,760
69,300
73,900
78,700
86,300
~~~
Alameda Countv
1.062 sq. mi.
1,355,900
1,4 13,300
1,486,100
1,547,000
593,740
655,090
733,360
796,240
46,600
5 1,400
55,600
6 1,400
Bav Area ( 1)
7.178 sq. mi.
6,504.600
6.875,400
7,249.500
7,533,200
3,037,950
3,358,990
3,7 15,020
3,97 1.380
54,500
60,200
65,500
7 1,300
( I )
( 2) Incorporated Ciry Limits.
( 3) City of Pleasanton Department of Planning and Community Development.
( 4) Mean household income in 1990 constant dollars.
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Proiections- 94, December 1993.
Nine counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, Mann, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano,
and Sonom.
1- 9
r
tn
c
L
4
w
-
>
w
W
a
n
a L
a
z
- . +
tn
W
I
f-a
=>
0
tn
i t a
K
Lu
- r
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
11. LAND USE ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 1
Industrial. Commercial. and Office Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 2
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 2
Open Space Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3
GENERAL PLAN LAND USES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3
Residential Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 5
Industrial. Commercial. and Offices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 5
Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 6
Specific Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 6
URBANGROWTHBOUNDARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
Pleasanton Ridgelands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 7
South Pleasanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 8
Vineyard Avenue Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 9
Downtown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 9
Busch Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
Sand and Gravel Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
HOLDING CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 10
11- 1 1
11- 1 1
Population and Employment Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Annexation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 12
Commercial. Business Park. and Industrial Land Use Redesignations
THE RELATIONSHIP OF JOBS AND HOUSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 12
LAND USE GOALS. POLICIES. AND PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 14
11- i
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables
Table 11- 1
Table 11- 2
Table 11- 3
?‘ able 11- 4
Table 11- 5
Table 11- 6
Table 11- 7
Table 11- 8
Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 23
Commercial. Office. and Industrial Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 24
Employment Density Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 25
General Plan Densities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 26
Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 27
Schools. Capacities and Enrollments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 28
Neighborhood. Community. and Regional Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 29
General Plan Acreage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 3 1
Figure 11- 1 Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 32
Figure 11- 4 School Facilities and Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 35
Figure 11- 6 Specific Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 37
Figure 11- 2 Commercial/ Office/ Industrial Complexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 33
Figure 11- 3 Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 34
Figure 11- 5 Neighborhood. Community. and Regional Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11- 36
The General Plan Map depicts the land uses referenced in the Land Use EIement .
11- ii
11. LAND USE ELEMENT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Land Use Element is to
provide policies and a land use map indicating
the planned location, amount, and intensity of
residential, commercial, and industrial lands,
as well as to provide guidance for public and
open space lands. The policies need to be
considered together with the General Plan
Map to understand the City’s intentions for
future development and conservation. The
General Plan Map implements the policies
contained throughout the Pleasanton Plan in
graphic form. It is intended to serve as an
illustration of the City’s plan for a desirable
pattern of land use throughout the Planning
Area.
EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
Pleasanton is well on its way to achieving its
goal of a well- planned and complete
community at General Plan buildout. The
following summarizes the existing community
conditions and future plans for the various
land uses within the Planning Area.
Residential Neighborhoods
The reason many newcomers cite for locating
in Pleasanton is its attractive and well- planned
neighborhoods. Pleasanton currently contains
many residential neighborhoods ( Table 11- 1
and Figure 11- 1) which offer a variety of
environments and lifestyles. The oldest is in
the Downtown which features buildings dating
back to the 1860’ s.
A major aspect of Pleasanton’s neighborhood
environment is the separation between
residential and non- residential uses. In
general, major business parks, regional
shopping, quarry operations. and freeways are
located at the periphery of the City, while
housing tends to be more centrally located.
This land use pattern minimizes
incompatibility among land uses and results in
the safe and attractive environment which
makes Pleasanton’s neighborhoods so livable.
The City’s street network features relatively
few major arterials, thus minimizing the
number of residents exposed to heavy traffic
and noise. Most homes front on minor
collector streets and cul- de- sacs which
meander through the community and create
quiet, safe environments. The street pattern
carves out distinct neighborhoods, each having
a diversity of uses: housing, a local park, an
elementary school, and access to retail and
community services. Most neighborhoods
have a variety of architectural styles,
substantial landscaping, street trees, sidewalks,
and bicycle paths.
As of January 1995, Pleasanton provided
21,180 housing units for approximately
57,347 residents. The housing mix included
about 13,590 detached single- family units
( 64 percent), 2,350 attached single- family
units ( 1 1 percent), and 5,240 multi- family
units ( 25 percent). The average household
size of single- family homes was 3.09
compared to 2.05 for multi- family. The
overall residential vacancy rate was very low
at 5.11 percent.
In the future, Pleasanton is projected to grow
to hold approximately 29,000 homes. This
figure assumes buildout of all residential lands
shown on the General Plan Map at average
densities ( Table 11- 4). The City’s Growth
Management Program ( see Housing Element)
currently limits annual housing growth to
750 units, or about 1,930 persons. At this
rate, Pleasanton would reach a population of
about 67,000 by the year 2000 and achieve a
buildout population of 74,500 in the Planning
Area around the year 2004 or later. These
projections depend on many factors including
the national and local economies, Tri- Valley
job growth, household size, average vacancy
rate, commute patterns, water supply,
wastewater treatment capacity, traffic capacity,
air quality, etc.
Industrial, Commercial, and Office
Development
Prior to 1980, Pleasanton was predominantly
a residential community with limited
employment opportunities. Since 1980, the
City has seen the development of a regional
shopping mall, seven major business parks,
five major hotels, and a variety of retail,
office, and service centers ( Table 11- 2 and
Figure 11- 2). Pleasanton’s economy supports
both basic industries, such as sand and gravel
harvesting, which export their products out of
the community, and non- basic industries, such
as local shops and services, which mainly
serve people within the community. All
industries are subject to strict standards
relating to traffic, air quality, noise, water,
sewer, and hazardous waste, and are
monitored by the City.
As of 1995, Pleasanton contained about
3,000 businesses ( excluding home
occupations) which together employed about
31,863 full and part time workers.
Approximately 21 percent of these workers
lived in Pleasanton, another 29 percent lived
elsewhere in the Tri- Valley, and the remaining
50 percent commuted from the greater
outlying area.’ The location of people’s place
of work compared with their place of
residence plays a crucial role in traffic
patterns, commuting time, energy
consumption, noise, and air pollution.
In the future, Pleasanton is projected to grow
to support an employment base of about
68,254 workers, assuming buildout of all
employment- generating lands shown on the
General Plan Map at average densities
( Tables 11- 3 and 11- 4). These workers will
represent a wide range of professional,
managerial, clerical, service, and other jobs in
a variety of industries.
Employment is expected to grow at an average
rate of about 1,520 jobs per year over the next
ten years. At this rate of employment
growth, Pleasanton will reach an employment
base of 47,100 by the year 2005. Buildout of
all employment uses should occur around the
year 20 18.
Community Facilities
One of Pleasanton’s distinguishing
characteristics is the provision of community
facilities. Almost every neighborhood
features a school and a park within walking
distance of its residents. In addition,
Pleasanton offers several large facilities which
serve the entire community such as the County
Fairgrounds, Pleasanton Sports Park, Century
House, Senior Center, and the Civic Center.
Many neighborhood and community- wide
facilities serve multiple functions in meeting
recreational, social, and cultural needs.
Meeting rooms are available at City Hall, the
Senior Center, and hotels; recreational
activities take place in school playgrounds and
gymnasiums; educational and social programs
11- 2
are offered at churches and City buildings.
The Pleasanton Department of Parks and
Community Services sponsors recreational,
educational, human service, and cultural
programs in these facilities which are enjoyed
by thousands of residents, year round.
Pleasanton's public facilities are continuously
being expanded to accommodate its growing
population and employment base. For
example, the City recently constructed a new
library, corporation yard, senior center, two
gymnasiums, and parks. A list of existing
community facilities is contained in
Tables 11- 5 and 11- 6 and illustrated in
Figures 11- 3 and 11- 4.
In the future, the City will need not only to
expand upon some of its existing facilities, but
also to add a greater variety of facilities to
serve its population. Facilities which may be
required in the future include a new City Hall,
additional community parks, community
centers, municipal golf course, convention
center, cultural arts facility, and municipal arts
center.
Open Space Areas
Pleasanton is blessed with an abundance of
open space. The developed areas of the valley
floor are surrounded by generally undeveloped
land on Pleasanton Ridge and the Southeast
Hills, in the sand and gravel quarry areas,
and in the vineyards in the South Livermore
Valley area. In addition, the City is
interspersed with numerous neighborhood,
community, and regional parks as shown in
Table 11- 7 and Figure 11- 5.
Pleasanton acquires and improves many of its
parks through its Park Dedication Ordinance.
This Ordinance enables the City to collect land
or " in- lieu fees" as a condition of approving
development projects. Many of the Cip's
neighborhood parks were acquired and
developed using this technique. In addition io
these. the Pleasanton Sports Park was acquired
through an agreement with the U. S.
Department of the Interior. Shadow Cliffs
Recreational Area was acquired and is
operated by the East Bay Regional Parks
District through property taxes used to
purchase reclaimed sand and gravel pits. The
Augustin Bernal Park in the Pleasanton
Ridgelands was acquired by the City through
a donation by Walter C. Johnson. Veterans
Plaza was acquired through outright purchase
by the City.
In the future, the City will need additional
park sites and open space in the areas of
Pleasanton Ridge, Southeast Hills. El Charro
Road, Busch Road, San Francisco Water
Department Bernal Avenue site, Vineyard
Avenue Corridor area, and other areas shown
on the General Plan Map. The acquisition and
improvement of future community parks will
require means other than simply the Park
Dedication Ordinance. such as possible
outright public acquisition, developer
contributions, governmental agreements,
regional park funds, private donations, and
other means. In addition, the City will
continue to require the provision of private
open space within residential developments to
serve the needs of neighborhood residents.
GENERAL PLAN LAND USES
The General Plan establishes fourteen land
use categories with which development must
be consistent. The General Plan Map
illustrates the general location where these
uses are allowed within the Planning Area.
All proposed projects must conform to the
land use designation( s) shown on the General
11- 3
Plan Map. Those which do not must receive
a General Plan Amendment to an appropriate
designation by the City Council in order to
develop a different use. Amendments to each
General Plan Element are allowed up to four
times per year, as per State law. The only
exception to this rule is land within the
Pleasanton Ridgelands area, which is subject
to a vote of the Pleasanton citizenry for any
General Plan Map amendment.
The City's Zoning Ordinance further defines
land use types and densities, building height,
parking, and other requirements of
development. Zoning designations must be
consistent with the General Plan Map. Zoning
designations include a specific list of uses
allowed within a particular zone. These
frequently include uses compatible with the
main use but different in type, such as
churches within industrial zones. The General
Plan intent is to incorporate the variety of
compatible uses which are generally allowed
by the zoning districts within each General
Plan designation. Accordingly, " permitted
and conditional" land uses allowed within the
various City zoning designations are
considered to be consistent with the
corresponding General Plan land use
categories.
Below is a general description of the land
uses allowed under the Pleasanton General
Plan. The allowable density of any zoning
designation for any individual parcel must fall
within the density range for the underlying
General Plan designation as shown on
Table 11- 4. Any use allowed within the
zoning district must also conform to the
General Plan.
When zoning individual properties, the City
shall attempt to balance development at the
upper end of the General Plan density range
with the lower end so that the average
densities shown in Table 11- 4 can be applied
city- wide. The City shall maintain a
maximum buildout of 29,000 housing units
within the Planning Area. The average
densities shown in Table 11- 4 were used to
calculate the holding capacity of the General
Plan and resulting levels of traffic, noise, and
air quality.
Residential properties which have unusual
topography, other characteristics which do not
lend themselves to development under
standard zoning, or unique features which a
developer wishes to incorporate within the site
should be zoned Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) . The maximum number
of units allowed on parcels zoned PUD shall
not exceed the maximum for the underlying
General Plan Map designation ( plus a possible
25 percent density bonus for the provision of
significant affordable housing), multiplied by
the number of gross developable acres in the
parcel. Gross Developable Acres shall
include all privately owned acreage within a
parcel and shall exclude all publicly owned
facilities ( e. g., City- owned parks, flood
control channels, and public school sites) or
such sites planned to be purchased by a public
agency. Acreage to be devoted to publicly
owned facilities dedicated as part of a project
( e. g. roadway rights- of- way, parks, and trails)
shall be included as " gross developable acres"
unless such acreage is rendered undevelopable
by other General Plan provisions. The
General Plan Map's conceptual depiction of
major arroyos as Open Space- Public Health
and Safety shall apply the Open Space
designation to the entirety of flood control
channel rights- of- way as ultimately determined
by the City. These arroyos are not to be
counted as part of residentially designated
" gross developable acres." The terrain of the
land shall be considered when land use
designations are given, so that terrain which is
not feasible for development does not get
redesignated to Low, Medium, or High
Density Residential.
Residential projects proposed for land
designated as Rural Density Residential
should be encouraged to cluster home sites on
lots of one acre or larger but may include any
housing type. Residential projects proposed
for land designated as Low and Medium
Density Residential should propose densities
generally consistent with the average densities
assumed for buildout of the General Plan, as
shown in Table 11- 4, and may include any
housing type. Low and Medium Density
projects which propose densities greater than
the average shown in Table 11- 4 should be
zoned PUD and contain sufficient public
amenities to justify for the higher density.
Examples of amenities which might qualify a
project for density bonus include the provision
of affordable housing; and dedication and/ or
improvement of parkland, open space, and/ or
trails beyond the standard requirements. Low
and Medium Density projects zoned PUD may
exceed the maximum density shown in
Table 11- 4 on portions of the site, as long as
the overall density for the entire site does not
exceed the overall maximum permitted.
Housing with increased densities on portions
of the parcel shall be sited to minimize
potential adverse impacts on adjacent,
developed properties. The maximum density
of properties designated as High Density
Residential shall be determined by the
underlying zoning designation.
Industrial, Commercial and Office projects
should generally conform to the average
densities assumed in Table 11- 4. However,
projects proposing intensities greater than the
, average assumed in Table 11- 4 may be allowed
up to the maximum indicated, provided that
sufficient amenities and mitigations are
incorporated into the project to justify the
increased density.
All projects receiving PUD approval prior to
the adoption of this comprehensive General
Plan update on August 6, 1996, shall be
deemed in conformance with the provisions of
this Plan.
Residential Areas
( See Table 11- 4)
Rural Density Residential - No more than
.2 dwelling units per gross developable
acre. Clustering of development shall be
encouraged with lots of one acre and
larger.
Low Density Residential - Less than two
dwelling units per gross developable acre.
Medium Density Residential - Between
two and eight dwelling units per gross
developable acre.
High Density Residential - Greater than
eight dwelling units per gross developable
acre.
Any housing type ( detached and attached
single- family homes, duplexes. townhouses,
condominiums, and apartments) in addition to
religious facilities, schools, day care facilities,
and other community facilities, may be
allowed in any of the residential designations
provided that all requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance are met.
Industrial, Commercial, and Offices
( See Table 11- 4)
Commercial and Offices ( Retail,
Highway, and Service Commercial;
Business and Professional Offices) -
Floor Area Ratios ( FARs) not to exceed
.6, except for hotels or motels which
should not exceed .7 and projects within
the Central Business District ( CBD) which
should not exceed 2.0. Certain uses, such
as warehouses, where employee density
and traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
General and Limited Industrial - FARs
not to exceed .5. Certain uses, such as
warehouses, where employee density and
traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
Sand and Gravel Harvesting - Land or
buildings used for the extraction of mineral
resources and related low intensity
activities such as ready- mix facilities and
asphalt batch plants. No significant
development is allowed in these areas.
Business Park ( Industrial, Commercial
and Offices) - FARs not to exceed .6.
Community Facilities
Public and Institutional - Any public or
institutional use, including religious
facilities, cemeteries, corporation yards,
sewage treatment facilities, utility
substations, hospitals, post offices,
community centers, senior centers,
libraries, and City Hall. FARs not to
exceed .6. Certain uses, such as
warehouses, where employee density and
traffic generation are minimal, may be
allowed with higher FARs provided they
are submitted as a Planned Unit
Development ( PUD) and meet all other
City requirements.
Schools - Any public or private educational
facility.
Open Space
Parks and Recreation - Neighborhood.
community, and regional parks. No
si@ icant development is allowed in these
areas.
0 Agriculture and Grazing - Land or
buildings used for the production of
agriculture or the grazing of animals. No
significant development is allowed in these
areas.
0 Public Health and Safety - Land set aside
for the protection of the public health and
safety due to geologic, topographic, fire,
or other hazards. No development is
allowed in these areas other than one
single- family home on existing lots of
record as of September 16, 1986 which
meet City requirements for access, public
safety, building site and architectural
design, etc.
Wildlands Overlay - Lands identified as
wildlife corridors and valuable plant and
wildlife habitats such as arroyos, the San
Antonio Reservoir area, highly vegetated
areas, and other natural areas necessary to
maintain significant populations of plant
and animal species. This is an " overlay"
designation which is additive to the
underlying General Plan Map designation.
No private development is allowed in these
areas other than one single- family home on
existing lots of record as of
September 16, 1986 which meet City
requirements for access, public safety,
building site and architectural design, etc.
11- 6
Specific Plan
All properties lying within the boundaries of a
Specific Plan Area are subject to the land
uses, densities, public improvements, and
other requirements specified in the Specific
Plan prepared for that area. The land uses,
densities, and street alignments shown on the
General Plan Map within these areas are
conceptual only and may change subject to the
outcome of the Specific Plan ( Figure 11- 6).
Medium and High Density Residential areas
designated on the General Plan Map with a
striping pattern are intended for the
development of both densities, to be
determined by the Specific Plan.
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
The General Plan Map designates an Urban
Growth Boundary ( UGB) line around the edge
of land planned for urban development at
General Plan buildout. The line
distinguishes areas generally suitable for urban
development and the provision of urban public
facilities and services from areas generally
suitable for the long- term protection of natural
resources, large lot agriculture and grazing,
parks and recreation, public health and safety,
subregionally significant wildlands, buffers
between communities, and scenic ridgeline
views. The UGB is intended to be permanent
and to define the line beyond which urban
development will not occur.
Lower densities should be encouraged along
the inside edge of the UGB to provide a
transitiodbuffer for preventing potential
conflicts with uses immediately beyond the
boundary such as agriculture and wildlands.
Since the UGB is considered to be permanent,
future adjustments are discouraged.
However, minor adjustments may be granted,
which meet all of the following criteria:
( 1) are otherwise consistent with the goals and
policies of the General Plan: ( 2) would nor
have a significant adverse impact on
agriculture, wildland areas, or scenic ridgeline
views; ( 3) are contiguous with existing urban
development or with property for which all
discretionary approvals for urban development
have been granted; ( 4) would not induce
further adjustments to the boundary; and
( 5:) demonstrate that the full range of urban
public facilities and services will be adequately
provided in an efficient and timely manner.
UGB locations adjacent to areas designated for
Sand and Gravel Harvesting in East
Pleasanton should be re- evaluated at such time
as comprehensive land use designation changes
are considered for the reclaimed quarry lands.
The existing Little Valley Road neighborhood
in South Pleasanton is designated as Rural
Density Residential, and located beyond the
UGB. However, since this neighborhood is
an existing partially developed area, five- acre
minimum parcel sizes may be permitted
without the provision of standard urban water
and sewer service, subject to public health and
safety considerations.
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Pleasanton Ridgelands
The Pleasanton Ridgelands area includes
approximately 13,000 acres generally bounded
by 1- 580, Palomares Road, Niles Canyon
Road, and the 670- foot elevation near Foothill
Road; excluding the existing communities of
Sunol, Kilkare Canyon, and Castlewood. Part
of the Ridgelands area is within the City of
Hayward, part within Pleasanton, and the
remainder in unincorporated area of Alameda
County.
The Ridgelands area consists of ridges and
valleys which separate the Tri- Valley area
from Castro Valley and the communities of
the East Bay Plain. It provides the primary
-
11- 7
western visual backdrop for Pleasanton and
joins the more westerly ridges in establishing
the topographic edge to Hayward and Castro
Valley. This predominantly undeveloped land
further provides an open space amenity of
regional significance. It is characterized by
steeply sloping, heavily forested eastern and
northern faces of the Pleasanton, Sunol, and
Main Ridges and broad grassland grazing
areas along ridge tops and southern and
western slopes. This scenic area also contains
substantial regional parkland, agricultural
land, and valuable wildlife habitat.
In November of 1993, Measure F was
approved by the Pleasanton voters which
directly relates to the Ridgelands. The intent
of the Measure is to preserve the remaining
agricultural open space and designate the
Ridgelands as Park and Recreation ( for
publicly- owned land) and Agriculture ( for
privately- owned land). In those areas
designated Agriculture, certain uses which
would be incompatible with the existing visual
quality are not allowed. The base density for
agricultural areas is 100 acres per building
site; and new homes may be located only on a
legal building site, must not interfere with
agricultural use in the area, and must not
interfere with documented public agency plans
to connect or create trails and open space
areas.
Measure F may not be amended as to land use
designations nor repealed except by a vote of
the citizens of Pleasanton.
South Pleasanton
South Pleasanton is characterized by rolling to
steeply sloping hills used predominantly as
grazing and watershed land, with low density
residential uses in the flat Happy Valley Area.
The General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear
Research Center dominates the largely
undeveloped Vallecitos Valley area north of
State Route 84, while the San Antonio
Reservoir watershed area, owned by the City
and County of San Francisco, covers much of
the area south of State Route 84.
The General Plan designates much of South
Pleasanton as Public Health and Safety, and
Wildlands Overlay, with no development
capacity other than a single- family home on
existing private lots of record. These
designations cover the steeper slopes, higher
elevations, areas subject to landslides and
other hazards, watershed land, and valuable
wildlife habitat and corridor areas. The
Happy Valley area that is designated as Low
Density Residential shall have a two- acre
maximum density. In determining parcel
size, consideration should be given to
surrounding parcels. Other close- in hilly
areas are designated as Rural Density
Residential to encourage the clustering of large
lot, custom homes suitable to this terrain. The
flat area located south of Happy Valley Road
is designated as Parks and Recreation for a
future municipal golf course. The General
Electric site is designated as General and
Limited Industrial, and some Rural Density
Residential is planned to the west of that
facility along Little Valley Road in an area of
existing ranchettes.
Consideration should be given to preserving
large open space acreage in South Pleasanton
by a combination of private open space and a
public park system. Trail rights- of- way and
land should be acquired by way of developer
dedications, as well as by bond measures,
corporate and personal donations, regional
State and Federal funding programs, etc.
Attempts to achieve public access to open
space areas and trails should not create
onerous impositions on property owners. In
11- 8
addition to open space and trails, an equestrian
center is also encouraged in South Pleasanton.
In the Happy Valley area, additional vehicular
use of the " Happy Valley Loop" ( Sycamore
Road, Aha1 Street. and Happy Valley Road)
is permitted to accommodate the planned
municipal golf course and the limited planned
residential development. Infrastructure
extensions to new development in this area
should be designed to accommodate
connections to existing homes having
substandard facilities.
Vinevard Avenue Corridor
The 368- acre Vineyard Avenue Corridor is
located in the southeastern portion of
Pleasanton, south of the Arroyo Del Valle and
west of Ruby Hill. Terrain is mostly flat
north of Vineyard Avenue and generally
transitions to steep slopes on the south side.
Vegetation consists mostly of oak woodlands
and grasslands in this sparsely developed area.
Due to the complexity of planning issues
raised by the Vineyard Corridor, a Specific
Plan should be prepared to coordinate land
uses, densities, aesthetics, circulation, and
lnfrastructure requirements. Future land use
designations should consist of Agriculture and
Grazing; Rural, Low, and Medium Density
Residential; Parks and Recreation; and
Commercial. Other possible uses should also
be considered which relate to the outlying
wine country, including " country" restaurants,
bed- and- breakfast inns, wineries, wine- tasting
rooms, tourist mformation, art galleries,
museums, bicycle rentals, etc. The Specific
Plan should include a target of 150 housing
units. An attractive gateway to the Livermore
Valley wine country should be accomplished
by developing Vineyard Avenue into a scenic
road entry, preserving substantial open space,
planting vineyards, and implementing a wine
country architectural and landscape design
theme throughout the Corridor.
Downtown
Downtown is the heart of Pleasanton and is
located at the center of the Planning Area. It
features the City's oldest buildings. its most
established residential neighborhoods.
tree- lined streets, and an identifiable image as
a classic early 1900' s " American Downtown. "
The Downtown has served many functions
over the past 120 years including a railroad
stop, agricultural exchange center, and
community shopping area. It contains many
of the historic features of the community
which should be preserved because of their
architectural design, historic value, and
contribution to the community character. The
challenge presented by the Downtown is to
find ways to integrate the changes needed to
serve the City's growing population and
employment base and still preserve the essence
of its small town character.
In recent years, a Specific Plan and
Downtown Revitalization Plan were adopted
by the City for the commercial area. A
variety of infrastructure, landscape, and
building improvements were subsequently
completed through a joint public/ private effort.
Similar planning and improvements for the
outlying heritage residential neighborhoods are
also needed to preserve and enhance this
unique area. This effort should analyze
specific parcel characteristics and provide
locally sensitive recommendations for
preservation and design. Mechanisms to
finance and implement the plan's
recommendations should also be established.
11- 9
Busch Property
The 9 1 - acre Busch property is located between
Mohr Avenue and Busch Road, next to the
Pleasanton Operations Service Center. The
site is flat and contains two heritage homes
and minimal tree cover. Development of this
site should be in conformance with the land
uses designated on the General Plan Map and
include a " traditional planning" design
concept; very generous front yard setbacks
along Mohr Avenue; preservation of the two
existing heritage homes with no new buildings
constructed in front of them; and at least nine
acres of parkland ( including up to three acres
of landscape improvements to the adjacent
Iron Horse Trail corridor). A maximum of
four housing units per acre should be
permitted for the Medium Density Residential
area, with a potential increase of an additional
one unit per acre for a superb " traditional
design" concept.
Sand and Gravel Harvesting
The eastern portion of the Planning Area
contains the largest deposits of sand and
gravel in the entire Bay Area. This land is of
special importance because of the value of its
mineral deposits to the region's economy, the
effects of extracting and transporting sand and
gravel on the local environment, and the
manner in which excavated land is reclaimed
for future use.
Alameda County, within whose jurisdiction the
gravel areas are mostly located, has adopted a
Reclamation Plan' which indicates the extent
of harvesting operations and identifies
potential future uses suitable for land once its
deposits have been extracted. The
Reclamation Plan calls for an open space and
recreation resource known as the Chain of
Lakes, a series of open gravel pits filled with
ground water after sand and gravel deposits
have been extracted. Shadow Cliffs
Recreational Area is an example of how these
pits can be reused, although not all of these
areas are suitable for such high- intensity
recreational use.
The quarry lands create a valuable urban
separator between Pleasanton and Livermore.
This land should be carefully studied during a
future comprehensive General Plan update,
and its qualities as an urban separator should
be substantially protected. Agriculture,
recreation, open space, and water management
should become its primary uses as opposed to
residential. The lake areas should be restored
to a safe and natural condition, and wildlife
areas should be regenerated to the fullest
extent feasible. Future re- use established by
the study should not take effect until after the
area is mined and reclaimed. The details of
future plans should be closely coordinated
with the affected property owners, City of
Livermore, Alameda County, and Zone 7.
Approximately 178 acres of reclaimed land
on the Kiewit and Kaiser Sand and Gravel
properties along Busch Road have been mined
and fully restored. The General Plan Map
now designates this land as 140 acres of
General and Limited Industrial, and 38 acres
of Parks and Recreation. If the park site is
ultimately not needed for park purposes, then
it should be redesignated as General and
Limited Industrial.
HOLDING CAPACITY
Holding Capacity is the ultimate size of the
community that can be accommodated if all
land uses shown on the General Plan Map
were to be built. Capacity is expressed in
terms of housing units, population,
11- 10
commercial/ office/ industrial building floor
area, and jobs at buildout.
If all residential land shown on the General
Plan Map were built out, Pleasanton would
contain approxmately 29,000 housmg umts
which would support a residential population
of about 74,500. This holding capacity
estimate assumes that residential land uses are
built to average densities ( Table 11- 4), vacancy
rates will average three percent, and
household size will level off at 2.65 persons
per household at buildout.
If all the commercial, office, industrial, and
other employment generating land were built
out, Pleasanton would contain approximately
28,176,500 million square feet of building
floor area, enough to support about
68,254 jobs. This holding capacity estimate
assumes that employment generating uses are
built at average densities ( Table 11- 4), vacancy
rates average seven percent, and employment
densities will approximate current levels
( Table 11- 3).
Table 11- 8 summarizes the number of acres of
each land use designated within the Pleasanton
Planning Area.
Population and Employment Projections
Residential Growth in Pleasanton is
controlled by the City’s Growth Management
Program3 which will permit up to 750 housing
units per year, based upon an assessment of
infrastructure capacity and other factors.
Assuming these rates of growth, projections of
population growth can be made to buildout of
the General Plan. As shown in Figure IV- 1 of
the Housing Element, Pleasanton can be
expected to reach a population of 67,000 by
the year 2000 and reach its holding capacity of
74,500 persons within the existing Planning
Area around the year 2004 or later.
Employment growth in Pleasanton is not
directly subject to growth management
although the effects of employment growth.
such as traffic. noise, and air quality. are
monitored by the City and subject to adopted
standards. Gruen Gruen + Associates4 has
projected employment growth using a
mathematical model which takes into account
the demand for building space over time, the
amount of existing vacant building space. and
developers’ propensity to invest in industrial.
commercial, and office buildings. Figure IV- 2
of the Housing Element illustrates these
projections for Pleasanton’s share of future
employment growth and compares them with
projections prepared by ABAG. 5
Employment in Pleasanton as of 1995 was
estimated to be 31,863. By the year 2000,
Pleasanton can be expected to support a total
of 40,000 jobs, and by the year 2010,
55,800 jobs. If this rate of employment
growth were to continue, buildout of all
employment generating uses would occur
around the year 2018 and total 68.254 jobs.
Commercial, Business Park, and
Industrial Land Use Redesignations and
Development
Land which is designated for Commercial,
Business Park, or Industrial use on the
General Plan Map, and which is either
developed, has a recorded final subdivision
map, and/ or has a development agreement
with the City is considered to provide
adequate total acreage for such uses. This
land should generally retain its current
designation, and not be redesignated for
residential use, with the possible exception of
the area surrounding the East Dublid
Pleasanton BART Station. Further
commercial, business park, and industrial
development beyond that described above
should take place in infill areas and should be
11- 1 1
subject to consideration of the following:
( 1) effect upon community character;
( 2) potential infrastructure constraints, such as
water supply, sewage capacity, street capacity,
police and fire service, etc.; ( 3) potential
environmental constraints, such as air quality,
noise, etc.; ( 4) potential fiscal impacts; and
( 5) potential subregional constraints.
Annexation
The annexation of remaining parcels of
unincorporated County land to the City is
crucial to completing an efficient system of
municipal services at General Plan buildout.
The following criteria should be followed for
evaluating future annexation proposals:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The capability of public agencies which
provide services such as water, sewer,
police, fire, transportation, solid waste
disposal, parks, and schools should be
adequate or expandable to support the
proposed development.
The proposed annexation should be a
logical extension of an existing planned or
developed area.
The land should not be under an
agricultural preserve or open space
contract.
The quality of the development proposed
for the area to be annexed should enhance
the existing community.
THE RELATIONSHIP OF JOBS AND
HOUSING
The relationship between jobs and housing is
a complex and often misunderstood topic
which affects all communities especially those,
like Pleasanton, within large metropolitan
areas. Workers choose jobs and residential
locations based on a variety of personal,
financial, and locational factors, not simply on
the basis of commute time or distance.
Therefore, a certain percentage of workers
will choose to live and work within the same
community, such as Pleasanton, a certain
percentage within the same commute area,
such as the Tri- Valley, and a certain
percentage will choose to live great distances
away from their places of employment. The
essence of the jobs/ housing issue is to
recognize these different types of commute
behavior and provide adequate housing
opportunities within the commute area desired
by each group of workers.
Planning to accommodate this diversity of
commute patterns involves identifying and
providing for employment generated housing
needs on three geographic levels - the
community, the commute area, and the region
( such as the Bay Area). State law6*’
recognizes each city’s and county’s
responsibility to accommodate employment-generated
housing needs. From a practical
perspective, fulfillment of this responsibility is
a regional concern which must allow for the
locational differences and varying needs
among communities within larger commute
areas. Pleasanton’s location at the intersection
of two freeways has played an important role
in establishing the City as a major
employment center within the Tri- Valley
area. Other communities, like Danville or
Alamo, enjoy a setting more conducive to
development as primarily residential
communities.
Planning for a balance of jobs and housing
within the Tri- Valley commute area, and not
necessarily within each jurisdiction, allows
each community to best use its own resources
11- 12
and develop its own identity, while ensuring
an adequate supply of housing within a
reasonable commuting distance of Tri- Valley
jobs. Pleasanton has adopted this area- wide
approach to the jobs/ housing issue and has
taken significant steps to contribute its share
of Tri- Valley housing while retaining its role
as an employment center.
The General Plan provides for the varied
housing needs of people who live and work in
the community by designating a wide range of
residential densities and adopting policies
aimed at all economic segments of the
community. The designation of high density
residential land within and adjacent to business
parks is a notable example of the City’s
efforts.
Pleasanton also provides jobs in large business
parks for people wishing to live within other
communities. The designation of land for
business park use in locations convenient to
freeways, arterials, and transit corridors in
North Pleasanton is a good example.
The City also provides a wide range of
housing opportunities for people who choose
to commute out of Pleasanton to work. The
wide range of housing types and prices
provided by the City’s distribution of Rural,
Low, Medium, and High Density housing is a
notable example.
The City’s policies to maintain its proportion
of high density housing and percentage of
rental units, and to encourage affordable
housing through its Growth Management
Program are examples of the City‘ s efforts to
help meet the affordable housing needs of
workers in Pleasanton, the Tri- Valley area.
and farther away locations. Pleasanton’s
strategy to provide housing and employment
opportunities to meet the full range of
commute behavior is the key to ensuring a
functional distribution of jobs and housing in
the Tri- Valley area.
Pleasanton has also followed the
recommendations of regional agencies and
taken steps to improve the relationship
between jobs and housing in its General Plan.
The goals, policies, and programs contained
throughout the General Plan address the City’s
role in cooperating with other jurisdictions to
provide for a functional distribution of jobs
and housing within the Tri- Valley while
allowing the City to develop into the type of
community desired by its citizens.
Land Use Goals, Policies, and Programs
The following goals, policies. and programs in
addition to those contained in other Elements,
constitute an action program to implement the
objectives described in this Element.
11- 13
11. LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
Overall Communitv Development
Goal 1: To achieve and maintain a complete well- rounded community of desirable
neighborhoods, a strong employment base, and a variety of commurhty facilities.
Residential
Policy 1 : Preserve the character of existing residential neighborhoods.
Program 1.1 : Enforce the provisions of the City's Zoning Ordinance to maintain
the character of existing residential neighborhoods.
Program 1.2: Use the City's development review procedures to minimize intrusions,
such as traffic and noise, into existing neighborhoods.
Program 1.3: Develop an ordinance which establishes the parameters for a grant of
density bonus for projects which provide substantial public amenities.
Policy 2: Develop new housing in inti11 and peripheral areas which are adjacent to existing
residential development.
Program 2.1: Zone vacant infill sites at densities to encourage development while
respecting the character of surrounding uses.
Industrial, Commercial and Office
Policy 3: Preserve the character of the Downtown while improving its retail and residential
viability and preserving the traditions of its small- town character.
Program 3.1 : Adopt a specific plan for the residential portions of the Downtown,
including provisions for housing density, preservation of small- town residential
character, architectural design compatibility, streetscape design, private open space,
parking, and other important planning considerations. The City Council should
appoint an ad hoc advisory committee to oversee preparation of the plan.
Program 3.2: Encourage the development of a Downtown activity center such as a
" town square park" or other public open space area to serve as a location for
outdoor community events.
11- 14
Program 3.3: Consider the development of a new City Hall in the commercial area
of the Downtown.
Program 3.4: Encourage second- floor apartments above first- floor commercial uses
in the Downtown.
Program 3.5: Consider bringing the historic train concept to the Downtown at no
cost to the City. Also, study other feasible uses of the Southern Pacific Railroad
right- of- way, except for vehicular circulation ( parking may be considered).
Policy 4: Ensure that neighborhood, community, and regional commercial centers provide
goods and services needed by residents and businesses of Pleasanton and its market area.
Program 4.1 :
commercial uses to support Pleasanton’s increasing business activity.
Zone sufficient land for neighborhood, community, and regional
Policy 5: Provide adequate neighborhood commercial acreage to serve the future needs of
each neighborhood at buildout.
Program 5.1 :
access to the residential neighborhoods they serve.
Locate appropriately scaled commercial centers with reasonable
Program 5.2: The City should not seek retail uses which present a high risk of
failure and could result in long- term vacancies in commercial centers.
Policy 6: Encourage industrial, commercial, and office development which is compatible
with environmental constraints in Pleasanton.
Program 6.1: Monitor the effects of commercial and industrial development on an
ongoing basis to measure compliance with City standards and conditions of
development approval.
Program 6.2: Encourage business parks and large employers to provide on- site child
care facilities.
Program 6.3: Promote the location of business services in Pleasanton to support
industrial, commercial, and office complexes.
Program 6.4: Generally discourage the redesignation of commercial, business park,
and industrial land to residential use, except for the area surrounding the East
DublidPleasanton BART Station.
Program 6.5:
between new non- residential development and areas designated for residential use.
Require non- residential projects to provide a landscape buffer
11- 15
Bav Area Rapid Transit
Policy 7: Establish a well- planned mixture of land uses around the East Dublin/ Pleasanton
BART Station.
Program 7.1: Form a citizens advisory committee and invite the City of Dublin to
participate in a study of land use alternatives, including some with housing. for the
area around the East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station.
Program 7.2: Provide flexibility for the Hacienda Business Park to transfer its
remaining 12 acres of High Density Residential development potential to the area
adjacent to the East Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station.
Communitv Facilities
Policy 8: Provide a diversity of community facilities to maintain and improve service levels
for existing and future residents.
Program 8.1 : Review and condition future developments to pay their fair share of
future community facilities and sites.
Program 8.2: Cooperate with the School District to enhance the quality of
education, anticipate and construct school facilities as they become needed, and
maximize joint use of school buildings and City parks and playgrounds.
Program 8.3: Conduct a needs assessment, investigate suitable sites and develop
financing to construct a new City Hall, additional community parks, community
centers, municipal golf course, convention center, cultural arts center, municipal arts
center, and other community facilities to serve the needs of the community at buildout
of the General Plan.
Policy 9: Provide each major residential area with high quality neighborhood facilities
including a park and other amenities, and encourage the location of an elementary school.
Program 9.1: Adopt specific plans for developing large landholdings to identify
facility needs and establish development guidelines.
ODen SDace
Policy 10: Preserve open space areas for the protection of public health and safety, the
provision of recreational opportunities, use for agriculture and grazing, the production of
natural resources, the preservation of wildlands, and the physical separation of Pleasanton
from neighboring communities.
11- 16
Program 10.1: Preserve open space by way of fee purchase, conservation and scenic
easements, transfer of development rights, Williamson Act contracts, open space
zoning categories, etc.
Policy 11 : Maintain a permanent Urban Growth Boundary ( UGB) beyond which urban
development shall not be permitted.
Program 1 1.1 : Permit only non- urban uses beyond the UGB.
Program 11.2: Extend urban services only to areas within the UGB. with the
following possible exceptions for selected urban services: ( 1) areas beyond the UGB
where the public health and safety present overriding considerations; ( 2) as to water
service, areas which are within the boundaries of the former Pleasanton County
Township Water District and where the service extension is consistent with the 1967
Joint Powers Agreement between the City and the District; ( 3) on reclaimed land
which is currently designated as Sand and Gravel Harvesting in East Pleasanton when
the potential future use is non- urban.
Program 11.3: Because the UGB is considered to be permanent, future adjustments
to the UGB line location are discouraged; provided, however, minor adjustments may
be granted that meet all of the following criteria: ( 1) are otherwise consistent with
the goals and policies of the General Plan; ( 2) would not have a significant adverse
impact on agriculture, wildland areas, or scenic ridgeline views; ( 3) are contiguous
with existing urban development or with property for which all discretionary
approvals for urban development have been granted; ( 4) would not induce further
adjustments to the boundary; and ( 5) demonstrate that the full range of urban public
facilities and services will be adequately provided in an efficient and timely manner.
Program 11.4: Encourage lower intensity uses immediately inside the UGB, as
necessary, to prevent potential land use conflicts with outlying non- urban uses.
Program 11.5: The foregoing Policy 11 and Programs 11.1 through 11.4, this
Program 1 1.5, and the Urban Growth Boundary designated on the City of Pleasanton
General Plan Map adopted August 6, 1996, and as readopted by the Pleasanton
Urban Growth Boundary Initiative, shall be amended only by a vote of the people.
Policy 12: Preserve scenic hillside and ridge views of the Pleasanton, Main, and Southeast
Hills ridges.
Program 12.1 : Implement the land use and development standards of the Pleasanton
Ridgelands Initiative of 1993 ( Measure F).
Program 12.2: Study the feasibility of preserving large open space acreage in the
Southeast Hills by a combination of private open space and a public park system.
11- 17
Land Use/ TransDortation Plannino,
Policy 13: Integrate land use and transportation planning in order to ensure patterns that
facilitate safe and convenient mobility of people and goods at a reasonable cost. and to
increase travel alternatives to the single- occupant automobiles.
Program 13.1: Reduce the need for vehicular traffic by locating employment,
residential, and service activities close together, and plan development so it is easily
accessible by transit, bicycle, and on foot.
Program 13.2:
buildings within existing urban areas.
Encourage the reuse of vacant and underutilized parcels and
Program 13.3: Encourage transit- compatible development near BART stations,
along transportation corridors, in business parks and the Downtown. and at other
activity centers to create effective destinations for transit.
Program 13.4: Promote pedestrian- oriented mixed- use centers, including
residential, commercial, and employment activities, easily accessible by foot, bicycle,
or transit.
Program 13.5: Permit higher residential and commercial densities in the proximity
of transportation corridors.
Program 13.6: Assure that new major commercial, office, and institutional centers
are adequately served by transit.
Program 13.7: Use design features in new development and redeveloped areas to
encourage transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access, such as connections between
activity centers and residential areas, and road design that accommodates transit
vehicles.
Program 13.8:
residential areas.
Encourage employment and neighborhood shopping in or near
Program 13.9: Encourage small- scale neighborhood telecommuting centers and the
infrastructure needed to support them in or near residential areas to enable residents
to work close to home.
Growth Management
Goal 2: To develop in an efficient, logical, and orderly fashion.
Policy 14: Regulate the number of housing units approved each year to adequately plan for
infrastructure and assure City residents of a predictable growth rate.
11- 18
Program 14.1: Use the City’s Growth Management Program to limit residential
growth to between 0 and 650 housing units per year, and reserve an additional
100 units per year for projects which include 25 percent or more lower- income
housing units. The annual allocation should be based on a periodic assessment of
housing need, employment growth, the availability of mfrasmcture. and the City’s
ability to provide public services.
Program 14.2: Prepare a “ Growth Management” report on which the City Council
can base its annual Growth Managemenr allocations.
Program 14.3: Monitor the effects of residential development, using the City’s
Growth Management Report, on an ongoing basis to measure compliance with City
standards and conditions of development approval.
Program 14.4: Undertake a study to determine if the maximum number of housing
units which may be constructed on an annual basis could be reduced taking into
account the following: a description of Pleasanton’s appropriate share of the regional
need for housing; a description of the specific housing programs and activities being
undertaken by Pleasanton to fulfill the requirements of Government Code $ 65302; a
description of whether and how the public health, safety, and welfare would be
promoted by reducing the number; the environmental and fiscal resources available
to Pleasanton, including the impact of State policies on the City’s budget and the
ability of the City in the future to provide adequate staff and services commensurate
with the staff and services available today; the assessment of Pleasanton’s housing
needs, employment growth, the availability of infrastructure, and the ability to
provide public services; the deteriorating traffic conditions on Interstates 680 and 580
and Pleasanton’s contributions to these conditions; the impact development has on
schools; and the certainty that mfrastructure will be in place when it is needed.
Policy 15: Maintain a maximum housing buildout of 29,000 housing units within the
Planning Area.
Program 15.1 : Monitor and zone future residential developments so as not to exceed
the maximum housing buildout.
Program 15.2: The foregoing Policy 15 and Program 15.1, and this Program 15.2,
shall be amended only by a vote of the people.
Policy 16: Annex urbanized pockets of unincorporated land adjacent to the city limits in
areas where landowners are willing to accept City services and development standards.
Program 16.1 : Explore methods of annexing the remaining unincorporated pockets
of urbanized land.
11- 19
Policy 17: Encourage development in locations which would complete or install planned
public facility systems.
Program 17.1: Use the Growth Management Program to select for early
development projects which complete and/ or install critical portions of the City’s
planned public facility systems.
Program 17.2: Invest in public facilities and amenities that support the infd of
development.
Program 17.3: Assure that services to existing developed areas are maintained at an
acceptable level when new development occurs.
Citizen Particbation
Goal 3: To encourage the participation of residents, businesses, and neighboring jurisdictions
in planning for community development.
Policy 18: Encourage the participation of Pleasanton residents and businesses in land use
planning and decision- making.
Program 18.1: Involve citizen committees in the formulation of City plans and
programs such as the Specific Plan for the Downtown residential area.
Program 18.2: Disseminate information regarding City policies and services to
Pleasanton residents and businesses through the use of information brochures, public
meetings, and cooperation with the media.
Policy 19: Review and update the Pleasanton General Plan as conditions change.
Program 19.1 : Conduct a review of General Plan Elements, policies and land uses
by public officials and citizens, including all economic segments of the community,
every five years.
11- 20
DEFINITIONS
Central Business District - The Downtown
commercial area which is bounded by First
Street, Stanley Boulevard, the Arroyo del
Valle, Peters Avenue, and Bernal Avenue.
Community Facilities - Schools, libraries,
senior centers. corporation yards, recreation
facilities, parks, City Hall and other civic
buildings, utility plants, religious facilities,
cemeteries, hospitals, and other similar
facilities.
Community Park - A park which serves the
entire community. It may provide parking
areas, restrooms, and facilities for community
activities, and may be scheduled for group
use. Such parks may have a specific focus
such as sports fields, tennis courts, or a
swimming pool.
Downtown - The older residential and
commercial areas bounded by Second Street,
Stanley Boulevard, the Arroyo del Valle, Fair
Street, Rose Avenue, Pleasanton Avenue, and
Bernal Avenue ( Figure 1- 3).
Existing Land Uses - Those currently
developed.
Holding Capacity of the General Plan - The
maximum number of housing units and
building square footage that could be
accommodated if all land uses shown on the
General Plan Map were built at average
densities.
Land Use - A specific utilization of land,
water, or air space ( e. g., housing, retail
commercial, or agriculture).
Neighborhood Park - A park which serves
primarily the neighborhood and provides play
areas for children, open fields for casual play.
and may provide casual use picnic areas.
Open Space - Any land or water which is
used for the preservation of natural resources.
promotion of outdoor recreation, production of
agriculture, protection of the public health and
safety, or preservation of wildlands.
Planned Land Uses - Those allowed by the
General Plan ( see Map) and Zoning
Ordinance.
Regional Park - A large area of land and/ or
water which provides amenities to serve a
regional area.
Slope - The ratio of the rise over the run of a
segment of land, where a vertical line would
have an infinite slope. For example, a vertical
rise of one foot over a horizontal run of one
foot ( equal to a 45- degree angle), has a slope
of 100 percent.
Specific Plan - A set of land use, density,
transportation, public facility, and open space
standards which clarify the application of
General Plan policies for a particular area.
Urban development - Development that
requires public water and sewer service, as
opposed to rural development which does not.
Zoning Ordinance - Divides a city into
districts within which only specific uses
( e. g., single- family homes or offices) are
allowed under certain conditions ( e. g., height
limits, parking requirements, etc.).
11- 2 1
FOOTNOTES
City of Pleasanton, Results of the 1995 4
TransDortation Survey and 1994
TransDortation Svstems Management
Program, August 15, 1995.
Alameda County, SDecific Plan for the
Livermore- Amador Valley Ou arry Area
Reclamation, November 198 1.
5
6
City of Pleasanton, MuniciDd Code. Title
17. ChaDter 17.36. Growth Management
Program, as amended.
7
Gruen Gruen + Associates, Proiections of
EmDlovment and Household Growth in the
Tri- Vallev Subregion, July 1985.
Association of Bay Area Governments,
Proiections 94, December 1993.
State of California, Government Code,
Section 65913.1.
State of California, Government Code,
Section 65583, et. seq.
11- 22
TABLE II- 1
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
Subarea
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Neighborhood
Canyon Creek
Canyon Meadows
West of Foothill
Highland Oaks
Stoneridge
Oak Hill
Foothill Farms
Foothill Knolls
Laguna Oaks
Foothill Place
Laguna Vista
Deer Oaks/ Twelve Oaks
Longview
Golden Eagle Farms
Castlewood
Oak Tree Farms
Oak Tree Acres
Val Vista
Valley Trails
Country Fair
Del Prado
Parkside
Siena
Valencia
AmberwoodNood Meadows
Willow West
Birdland
Pleasanton Valley
Downtown
Civic Square
Ridgeview Commons
California Somerset
Pleasanton Meadows
Hacienda Gardens
Subarea
35
36
37
38
39
40
411
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
5s
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Neighborhood
Las Positas Garden Homes
Verona
Belvedere
Gatewood
Stoneridge Park
Stoneridge Orchards
Mohr- Manin
Mohr Park
Pleasanton Village
Sycamore Place
Rosewood
Heritage Valley
Danbury Park
Amador Estates
Jensen Tract
California Reflections
Vintage Hills
Remen Tract
Vineyard Avenue
Foxbrough Estates
Grey Eagle Estates
Ruby Hill
Pleasanton Heights
Old Towne
Kottinger Ranch
Bonde Ranch
Mission Hill
Mission Park
Lund Ranch
North Sycamore
Rosepointe
Carriage Gardens
Happy Valley
Southeast Pleasanton
& e: See Figure 11- 1 for neighborhood locations.
11- 23
.2E.
3 es .
e m
E3 " 3
00
00
W
h)
00
m4
VI
00
L-e
s 9
W
L-
00
t\ mo
P
W
9 E
s ae c
c
CD
a
7 i
0 ch
0
CD
3
F U
r
z
ca2
I", a.
E
I.
00
P CD
1 2.
E z SL
m
\ o
P
VI
h)
L
e
W
00
L
R h)
e
w
a
E
2
z
%
5.
CD
W
C
3
3
P 8
8.
E
0
" r
0
CD
3
VI
W
P
W
P
VI
W
P
W
P
- h)
E 2
CD
Y
W E
a
8
a
I.
0) :
7
5-
CD P 8
c.
E
c
Ea?
a.
E
3
00
3 c1
5
2
0
CD
t3
00
4
4
h)
N
00
W
0
h) z
- L
<
E
W
- Q
5.
8 rA
2 1
F?
r.
P
aJ
a.
0
w
6
W
I
" r
0
CD
3
4
00
00
h) m W
00
VI
W
W m W
L
0
5!
9
E
:
CD
I
a.
E.
a
r
Gz*
Ea7
C
I", aE.
h) 0
P
L-L
L
" E
L
L
L
\ o
w a
5.
5a . >
0
W a
1
CD
W
P 8
P.
E
F
8
$
P
N
\ o
4
P
L
P
h) W
P
2
m
z P.
CD
3 a
p'
W
3
cn
E.
8
s 2
0 ch
0
CD
3
F U
r. 00 a-
3
C
c - a
I",
E.
- 1.
8 P
- 0.
E
P
00 " E
0
00
VI
00
e " 5
P
00 W
4
v,
3
E'
2
%
2
9
CD
2
0
" r
0
CD
3
g U
c
z
aJ C
'", a.
E
00
P CD
1 c.
E
P
P
0
m 2
e
L
4
VI
VI 2
o\
E
E
2
CD
W
0
3
a :
0
" r
0
CD
3
g U
c
aJ
a.
E
00 a- c
6
P 8
c.
E
v,
P
00
W
h) m
m m 4
E
VI
2
3
s
E
z.
3
3
CD
1 c
a0-
3
U
CD
F
$
U
<
E
c
z
a2
a.
E
= r
0
CD
00
6
2 SL
e a W
m
VI
e
L-W
00
4
00
00 W
P
0
3
9
ii:
0
09
CD
3
s 0
1
E W
N
01
0 ch
0
CD
3
F I", E
2
2
W
\ o
0
m
W
4
L
c
00
VI
h)
P
"
L-e
s2
cn
I i?
r% n
3
0
CD
0 ch
0
CD
3
e cn
0
0 8
e
VI
0
0 8
11- 24
TABLE II- 3
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY STANDARDS
WorkDlace TvDe
Office
Research & Development
Light Manufacturing
Warehouse/ Service Industrial
Service Commercial
Retail
Restaurant
Hotel/ Motel
Average Square Feet
Per Emdovee
260
360
590
5 90
490
5 10
170
1,060
Source: Gruen Gruen + Associates, Emulovment Densities bv Tvue of Worblace, July 1985.
11- 25
TABLE 11- 4
GENERAL PLAN DENSITIES
Land Use
Designation
Rural Density
Residential
Low Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Commercial/
Office
General & Limited
Industrial
Business Park
Sand and Gravel
Harvesting
Allowable
Densitv RanPe
0- 2 d. u./ acre
0- 2 d. u./ acre
2- 8 d. u./ acre
8+ d. u./ acre
0- 60% F. A. R.
0- 5095 F. A. R.
0- 60% F. A. R.
0
Average Density
Used for Calculating
Holding CaDacitv
.2 d. u./ acre
1 . O d. u./ acre
5.0 d. u./ acre
15.0 d. u./ acre
35% F. A. R.
31% F. A. R.
32% F. A. R.
0
11- 26
TABLE II- 5
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Map #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Name and Address of Facilitv
Adult Education/ Amador Hs - 4665 Bernal Avenue
Alameda County Health Department - 3730 Hopyard Road
Amador High School Tennis Courts - 1155 Santa Rita Road
Amador Recreation Center - 4455 Black Avenue
Amador Theater - 1155 Santa Rita Road
Century House - 2041 Santa Rita Road
City Operations Service Center - 3333 Busch Road
Community Clubhouse/ Amador Park - 4455 Black Avenue
County Fairgrounds - 4501 Pleasanton Avenue
Cultural Arts Center - 4477 Black Avenue
Department of Motor Vehicles - 6300 W. Las Positas Boulevard
DublinISan Ramon Sewage Plant - 7399 Johnson Drive
Fairlands Park Tennis Courts - West Las Positas Boulevard/ Gulfstream Street
Fieldhouse - 5800 Parkside Drive
Fire Station 1 - 4444 Railroad Avenue
Fire Station 2 - 6300 Stoneridge Mall Road
Fire Station 3 - 3200 Santa Rita Road
Harvest Park Middle School Gymnasium - 4900 Valley Avenue
Historical Society Museum - 603 Main Street
Library - 400 Old Bernal Avenue
Livermore- Amador Valley Wastewater Management Agency - 7 176 Johnson Drive
Memorial Gardens/ St. Augustine Cemetery - Sunol Boulevard
Muinvood Park Tennis Courts 4701 Muirwood Drive
Pleasanton Aquatic CentedAmador Park - 4455 Black Avenue
Pleasanton City Hall - Civic Center - 200 Old Bernal Avenue, 123 Main Street
Pleasanton Middle School Gymnasiums - 5001 Case Avenue
Pleasanton School Tennis Courts - 4750 First Street
Police Department - 4833 Bernal Avenue
Post Office - 4300 Black Avenue
Pre- School " Gingerbread House" - 4333 Black Avenue
School District Office - 4665 Bernal Avenue
Pleasanton Senior Center - 5353 Sunol Boulevard
Regalia House - 4133 Regalia Court
Sewage Treatment Ponds - Near Stoneridge Drive and Johnson Drive
Tennis and Community Park - 5801 Valley Avenue
Valley Care Medical Center - 5555 West Las Positas Boulevard
Zone 7 Administration Building - 5997 Parkside Drive
&&: See Figure 11- 3 for community facility locations.
~
11- 27
TABLE II- 6
SCHOOLS, CAPACITIES AND ENROLLMENTS
1994- 95 School Year
Permanent Building
Map # Name rn CaDacity Enrollment
Pleasanton Unified School District
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Alisal
Fairlands
Valley View
Vintage Hills
Walnut Grove
Donlon
Lydiksen
Harvest Park Middle
Pleasanton Middle
Amador High
Foothill High
Village HS ( continuation)
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
K- 5
6- 8
6- 8
9- 12
9- 12
9- 12
654
678
660
444
774
834
573
920
1,142
1,800
1,400
617
662
685
495
922
933
526
967
1,274
1,620
1,075
149
Future and Potential School Sites
Map # School TpDe Location Acreage
13
14
15
Elementary School Stoneridge Drive Area 5.0'
Elementary School San Francisco Water Dept. Lands 5.0'
Middle School Hacienda Business Park 19.0
I
&: See Figure 11- 4 for school faciliry and site locations.
Source: Pleasanton Unified School District.
Does not include jive- acre adjacent, shared Ciry neighborhood park.
11- 28
TABLE II- 7
NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY, AND REGIONAL PARKS
Ciw of Pleasanton Parks
Mau #' Park Name/ Address
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Augustin Bernal Park
Amador Valley Park, S . Rita RdJBlack Ave.
Bicentennial ParW2401 Santa Rita Rd.
Centennial Park/ 5353 Sun01 Blvd.
Civic ParW100 Main St.
Del Prado ParW6701 Hansen Dr.
Delucchi ParW4501 First St.
Fairlands ParkW. Las Positas Blvd.
Hansen ParW5697 Black Ave.
Harvest ParWl401 Harvest Rd.
Heatherlark ParW5700 Northway Rd.
Kottinger Park/ lOOO Kottinger Dr.
Kottinger Village/ 4100 Vineyard Ave.
McKinley Park/ 519 Kottinger Dr.
Meadowlark Park, 8200 Regency Dr.
Meadows Park/ 3201 W. Las Positas Blvd.
Mission Hills Park/ 600 Juniper0 St.
Moller ParW5500 Pleasant Hill Rd.
Muirwood Park14701 Muirwood Dr.
Nielsen ParW3800 Stoneridge Dr.
Oakhill Park/ 7600 Olive Dr.
Orloff Park/ 1800 Santa Rita Rd.
Sports and Recreation Park/ 5800 Parkside Dr.
to Gulfstream St.
Tennis and Community Park/ 5801 Valley Ave.
Sutter Gate Park/ 4801 Sutter Gate Ave.
Tawny ParkMOO Tawny Dr.
Valley Trails ParW3400 National Park Rd.
Val Vista ParW6701 Payne Dr.
Veterans Plaza/ 550 Peters Ave.
Vintage Hills Park/ 3301 Arbor Dr.
Walnut Grove ParkL51.50 Northway Rd.
Wayside Park14410 First St.
Woodthrush Park1505 1 Woodthrush Rd.
XYIE
C
C
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
N
C
N
N
N
C
C
N
N
N
N
C
N
N
C
N
Acreape
237.00
23.50
2.69
5.70
.70
5 . oo
.70
13.80
6.15
1.60
.76
14.50
4.90
5.30
4.30
5 . OO
8.50
7.00
13.90
5 . OO
3.88
8.12
105.00
15.00
2.70
3.76
6.10
10.70
.50+
4.00
3.50
.70
3.50
Functions
U
B, BP, L. P, FC. PE, RE, S. SW. T
L, T
B . BE. L. P, PC , T
BE, L, P, T
B, BB. BE, L, P, PE. T
B, BE, P, T
BP , L, PE, T , TE, S , SO
BB, P, PE, S, SO, T
L. PE
BE, L, PE , T
BP, L, P, T
BB, L, P, PC, PE, T
B, OS
B, BB, L. P, PE, T
BB, L, P, PE, T
B, BB, L, P, PE, T
BE. BP, L, P. PE. T
B, BB, L, P, PE, RE, SO, T, TE
B, BB, BE, L, P, PE, T
BP, L, PE, T
BB , BE, BP. L, PC . PE, T
B. BA, BB, BP, L, P, PE, RE.
B, L, PE, T. TE, U ( 10 Acres)
BB , L, P, PE, T
BA, BB, BE. BP. L. PE, T
B, BB. BP, L, PE. T
P, PE, T
B, L, PE, T
BP, L, P, PE, T
B, P, T
BD, L, P
BP, L, T
S, SB. SO, ST, T
- Note: Legend on following page.
11- 29
TABLE 11- 7
NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMUNITY, AND REGIONAL PARKS
( Continued)
East Bay Regional Park District Parks
Map # Park Name/ Address TvDe Acreape
34 Pleasanton Ridge Park
35 Shadow Cliffs Recreational Area
R 3,000.00+
R 249.00
Future Community Parks
Map # Park Name/ Address TvDe Acreape
36 San Francisco Water Department Bernal site, C 35.00
37 Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan site, C 29.70
38 Kaiser Property site, Busch Rd. C 38.00
Bernal Ave.
Stoneridge Dr.
39 Vineyard Corridor site, Vineyard Ave. C 20.00
Legend:
B = Barbecue
BA = Baseball
BB = Basketball
BD = Bandstand
BE = Benches
BP = Bike/ Ped Path
C = Community Park, including
F = Fishing
GL = General Location
H = Hiking
special use areas
L = Landscaping
N = Neighborhood Park
OR = Outdoor Roller Skating
OS = Open Space
P = Picnic
PB = Paddle Boats
PC = Par Course
PE = Play Equipment
R = Regional Park
RE = Restrooms
S = Soccer
Functions
os
B, BP, F, H, P, PB, SW, T, WS,
WSS, Private Boating
Functions
Undetermined
Undetermined
U ndetermined
Undetermined
SB = Snack Bar
SO = Softball
ST = Skateboard Track
SW = Swimming
T = Turf
TE = Tennis
TN = Temporary Name
WS = Water Slide
WSS = Wind Surfing School
U = Undeveloped
- Note: See Figure II- 5 for park locations.
Source: City of Pleasanton Department of Parks & Community Services.
11- 30
TABLE 11- 8
GENERAL PLAN ACREAGE
General Plan Cateporv
RESIDENTIAL
Rural Density
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
INDUSTRIAL/ COMMERCIAL/ OFFICE
Commercial and Office
General and Limited Industrial
Business Park
Sand and Gravel Harvesting
COMMUNITY FACILITIES
Public and Institutional
Schools
OPEN SPACE
Parks and Recreation
Agriculture and Grazing
Public Health and Safety
Vineyard Avenue Corridor Study Area
General Plan Acreape
1,752
3.055
3,434
922
784
558
1,052
2,548
642
253
5,429
1 1,375
15,693
368
TOTAL PLANNING AREA 47,865
Wildlands Overlay 13.554
11- 3 1
s 0
11- 32
.'
L
zi
3
11- 34
' I i
:: r
5 . -
I . - .,-
0
.1
&
ea
- 0- m
/"' \
,,'
/' i'
~
11- 36
=+
L
b
0
y0.)
11- 37
THE PLEASANTON GENERAL PLAN
~~
111. CIRCULATION ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Description of the Existing Roadway Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Existing Roadway Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 1
Existing Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 2
Future Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Traffic Projection Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Future Traffic Model Runs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 3
Future Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 4
Proposed Roadway Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 5
Proposed Traffic Management Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 6
Potential Problem Intersections and Mitigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 6
Proposed Funding Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES . .
Public Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transportation Systems Management . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 8
CIRCULATION GOALS. POLICIES. AND PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111- 10
111- i
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Page
Table 111- 1
Table 111- 2
Table 111- 3
Table 111- 4
Table 111- 5
Table 111- 5
Table 111- 6
Table 111- 7
Table 111- 8
Desirable Level of Service Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of Levels of Service for Intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Average Daily Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Volume- to- Capacity Ratios and Levels of Service . .
Peak- Hour Traffic Conditions . Interstate 580 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Peak- Hour Traffic Conditions . Interstate 680 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Critical Intersection Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Future Roadway Lane Configuration by Roadway Segment . . . . . . . . .
Current Daily Ridership of Tri- Valley Transit Systems . . . . . . . . . . . .
111- 19
111- 20
111- 2 1
111- 23
111- 25
111- 26
111- 27
111- 28
111- 30
Figure 111- 1
Figure 111- 2
Figure 111- 3
Figure 111- 4
Figure 111- 5
Figure 111- 6
Figure 111- 7
Figure 111- 8
Figure 111- 9
Existing Street Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Study Intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proposed Intersection Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Community Trails Master Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Average Daily Traffic Count Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Future Average Daily Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schedule of Roadway Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing and Future Traffic Signal Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proposed Transit System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The General Plan Map depicts the circulation system referenced in the Circulation Element .
111- 3 1
111- 32
111- 33
111- 34
111- 35
111- 36
111- 37
111- 38
111- 39
111- ii
In. CIRCULATION ELEMENT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to
provide policies and maps which indicate the
general location and extent of existing and
proposed circulation routes and facilities; to
provide a transportation system adequate to
serve the traffic projected to be generated by
the land uses shown on the General Plan Map,
as well as regional through traffic; to promote
the efficient transport of people and goods;
and to encourage the efficient use of existing
transportation facilities.
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
Pleasanton is served by an extensive roadway
network which includes freeways, arterials,
collectors and local streets. The Pleasanton
Plan uses standard classifications for its
roadway system. These classifications indicate
the type of use expected and guide in roadway
planning and design. Freeways are
characterized by their limited access and grade
separations and primarily serve long distance
trips. Arterials feed through- traffic to
freeways, provide access to adjacent land
uses, mostly at intersections, and feature
traffic control measures. Collectors provide
access to adjacent land uses and feed local
traffic to arterials. Neighborhood Collectors
provide access to residential areas and feed
traffic from local streets to arterials. Local
streets are designed to serve only adjacent
land uses in both commercial and residential
areas. Many local streets are cul- de- sacs or
serve only a limited area of homes to reduce
traffic volumes and improve safety.
Figure 111- 1 shows the existing roadways. and
Figure 111- 5 shows future additions. Typical
desirable Level of Service ( LOS) for these
types of roadways are shown in Table 111- 1.
Description of the Existing Roadway
Network
Pleasanton is served by two Interstate
Freeways and one State Route. Interstate 580
is an eight- lane freeway which runs east- west
from Interstate 5 near Tracy to Interstate 80 in
Emeryville. Interstate 680 is a six- lane
freeway, south of 1- 580, and a six- lane
freeway with additional high- occupancy
vehicle ( HOV) lanes north of 1- 580. It runs
north- south from Interstate 280 in San Jose to
Interstate 80 near Fairfield. State Route 84 is
a two- lane highway which runs from 1- 580 in
Livermore to Highway 1 near San Gregorio.
Arterials serving the Pleasanton Planning
Area include Foothill Road, Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Santa Rita Road. Main
Street, Owens Drive, Rosewood Drive,
Stoneridge Drive, West Las Positas
Boulevard, Valley Avenue, Vineyard Avenue,
Stanley Boulevard, Bernal Avenue, First
Street, and Sunol Boulevard. Pleasanton is
also served by numerous collectors and local
streets.
Existing Roadway Standards
The City of Pleasanton has adopted numerous
roadway standards and requirements to
protect the safety and welfare of its citizens.
Public streets within the city limits are
constructed and maintained to City standards.
Most City streets feature at least 12- foot wide
travel lanes, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.
Stop signs, traffic signals, pedestrian
crosswalks, and bicycle lanes are installed
where traffic conditions warrant and sufficient
rights- of- way exist. Exceptions include older
streets which were built prior to modem road
standards, areas in which rights- of- way are
insufficient for roadway improvements, or
streets for which insufficient funds exist for
improvements.
Pleasanton also has standards for controlling
traffic congestion at critical intersections
outside of the Downtown area. These Level
of Service ( LOS) standards require
developers of major projects to limit traffic
volumes to a maximum of LOS D
( Table 111- 2) at these critical intersections or
develop mitigations which will ensure that
traffic volumes meet this standard. Potential
mitigations include roadway improvements
such as street widening, traffic trip reductions
such as ridesharing, or limiting the density or
type of adjacent land uses.
The City also regulates traffic speeds and
movements and establishes parking
requirements. Traffic speed limits are
established according to roadway type,
capacity, prevailing speed, condition, and
accident rates. Moving violations are
established in the City’s Vehicle and Traffic
Code2 and are enforced by the Pleasanton
Police Department. Parking requirements
are established in the City’s Zoning
Ordinance3 and enforced by the Planning
Department when plans are reviewed for new
buildings or additions. Parking requirements
are reduced in the Downtown area to
encourage higher density uses. The Zoning
Ordinance also establishes standards for
parking lot dimensions.
Existing Traffic Conditions
Traffic volumes are measured in terms of
Average Daily Traffic ( ADT) and peak hour
volumes. Average Daily Traffic is defined as
the total number of cars passing over a
segment of roadway, in both directions. on an
average day. Peak hour traffic is defined as
the total number of cars passing over. a
roadway segment during the busiest hour of
the morning or afternoon on an average day.
In Pleasanton, the peak hours are generally
from 7: 30 A. M. to 8: 30 A. M. and from
4: 30 P. M. to 5: 30 P. M., and typically
constitute eight to twelve percent of Average
Daily Traffic ( ADT) volume, Table 111- 3.
The relative congestion of roadways is
measured by the peak hour traffic volume
divided by the capacity of the roadway
segment or intersection. The resulting ratio is
called a V/ C ratio. Levels of Service are
determined from the V/ C ratios. Table 111- 2
defines the range of Levels of Service and
describes the resulting effects on traffic
congestion.
As can be seen from Table 111- 3, the busiest
roadway segments in Pleasanton at the
present time are on the major arterials
approaching the interstate freeway system.
Nearly 79 percent of Pleasanton jobs are
performed by workers who reside outside of
Pleasanton. Conversely, approximately
75 percent of Pleasanton residents work
outside of Pleasanton. This tends to focus
trips on the arterial system going to and from
the freeways.
The quality or ease of traffic flow on a given
roadway segment is almost always defined by
the volume and capacity of the nearest arterial
intersection. In the case of Hopyard Road,
the major location of congestion along the
roadway is at the intersection of Hopyard
Road and Stoneridge Drive. Much of this
111- 2
traffic is destined either to or from the
freeway interchanges at Stoneridge Drive and
1- 680 or at Hopyard Road and 1- 580. All
intersections within Pleasanton are currently
below the City’s adopted standard of LOS D.
Only one intersection, Foothill Road and
Canyon Way, is at LOS D and then only in
the PM peak. The majority of intersections
fall within the LOS A and B range.
Future Conditions
Traffic Proiection Model
In order to forecast General Plan buildout
traffic volumes and Levels of Service, the City
of Pleasanton uses a traffic projection model
based on buildout of all the land uses shown
on the General Plan Map. The particular
system used to project traffic is the MINUTP
traffic model. This model is based on the
roadway network shown on the General Plan
Map which consists of the existing street and
highway network ( Figure 111- 1) plus future
roadway improvements ( Figure 111- 5).
Projected traffic volumes are calculated using
the total amount of housing units and
commercial/ office/ industrial building square
footage contained in the Land Use Element at
buildout of the General Plan. This
information is divided into traffic zones within
the Planning Area and translated into traffic
volumes using various trip generation rates for
different types of land use.
Traffic volumes are projected for each future
housing and square foot of new commercial
office/ industrial building floor area. These
volumes are assigned to trip destinations in
relationship to current travel patterns and
added to the existing traffic counted on the
street. Traffic volumes are then fed onto local
streets, collectors, arterials, and highways
using a formula which determines, by way of
projected uaffic speeds and travel times.
which route traffic will rake to reach a given
destination. The total of traffic generated by
new development plus existing traffic volumes
is then subjected to an mtersection capacity
analvsis. The resultant level of service is next
analyzed for rationality and practicality.
In addition to the Pleasanton Traffic Model.
the Tri- Valley Traffic Model is used to
evaluate regional traffic which includes
through- traffic that does not enter Pleasanton.
This system is an EMME2 traffic model
which was developed and is maintained by the
Tri- Valley Transportation Council. Alameda
County also uses an EMME2 traffic model for
Congestion Management Agency ( CMA)
purposes, which involve a county- wide
perspective. The Tri- Valley Model is used for
impact analysis in the Tri- Valley Area.
Future Traffic Model Runs
The City traffic model was first run to
determine traffic volumes and Levels of
Service for the 1986 General Plan land use
and roadway network. Intersections which
would exceed the City’s standard of LOS D
were identified. These are shown in
Table 111- 6.
Land use and transportation network changes
proposed by the current General Plan were
then integrated into the traffic model, and the
model was run once again. The
volume- to- capacity results are shown in
Table 111- 4. The primary roadway
improvements required to be added to the
existing roadway network are illustrated in
Figure 111- 5, and the intersection
improvements are shown in Figure 111- 7.
Assuming these improvements are made prior
to the generation of future traffic trips, all
intersections within the Planning Area will be
maintained within the City’s standard of
111- 3
LOS D except for two Downtown intersections
at Main Street and Ray StreetISaint John
Street, and Main Street and Rose Avenue/ Neal
Street. The traffic volumes and Levels of
Service resulting from buildout of all the land
uses and improvement of all the roadway
segments and intersections are discussed
below.
Future Traffic Conditions
In order to adequately plan for future
development, the General Plan roadway
network is designed to accommodate buildout
of all land within the Planning Area.
Roadways are sized, intersections are
designed, and alternative transit systems are
proposed which will enable full development
to occur within City Level of Service
standards, except in the Downtown area. The
Downtown is an exception because its historic
nature and need to preserve pedestrian
character generally prohibit the widening of
streets and the elimination of street parking.
In the future, traffic volumes will increase
substantially over existing conditions.
Table 111- 3 compares average daily traffic
volumes in 1995 with those projected for
buildout of the General Plan. As could be
expected from the large amount of business
park development, much of the projected
increases in traffic will occur on roadways in
North Pleasanton. The largest increases are
projected to occur on Hopyard Road,
Hacienda Drive, Santa Rita Road, El Charro
Road, Stoneridge Drive, and West Las Positas
Boulevard. Major arterials in other parts of
the City for which major traffic increases are
projected include Valley Avenue, Bernal
Avenue, Sunol Boulevard, and Stanley
Boulevard. In all cases, projected ADT's and
intersection levels of service were used to plan
roadway widths and intersection
improvements.
Congestion at major intersections will also
increase, although not to the point of impeding
the flow of traffic on arterials outside the
Downtown area. Figure 111- 4 illustrates the
study locations used for evaluating the street
system performance. Table 111- 4 compares
volume- to- capacity ratios at these locations
and lists the resulting Levels of Service in
1995 with those projected at General Plan
Buildout. Major declines in Levels of Service
from the current " A" and " B" levels is
expected on all arterial routes. However.
acceptable levels will be maintained except in
the Downtown area.
Traffic volumes along 1- 580 and 1- 680 will
also increase substantially from a combination
of development within Pleasanton and an even
much greater increase in traffic from outlying
areas. Freeway peak hour traffic volume and
Level of Service conditions are indicated on
Table 111- 5. Level of Service standards for
freeways have been adopted by the Alameda
County Congestion Management Agency and
the Tri- Valley Transportation Council at
Level E. Projected violations of the LOS are
shown for 1- 580 between the Hacienda Drive
interchange and the El Charro Road
interchange and between Foothill Road and
1- 680. The only LOS violation for 1- 680 is
southbound in the morning, south of the Sunol
Boulevard interchange.
Increased traffic in the Tri- Valley is
anticipated from major developments such as
Dougherty Valley, Tassajara Valley, North
Livermore, East Dublin, and smaller
developments. Year 2010 projections by the
Tri- Valley Traffic Model4 indicate near-capacity
conditions along both the 1- 580 and
1- 680 freeways even with the major planned
improvements ( i. e., the BART extension,
State Route 84 widening, high- occupancy
vehicle lanes added to 1- 580, extension of
arterial streets parallel to 1- 580 in
111- 4
Dublin/ Pleasanton/ Livermore, and the
1- 5804- 680 flyover south- to- east). These
conditions are expected to requlre ramp
metering at most freeway interchanges in the
Tri- Valley and " gateway constraints," such as
the Altamont Pass to limit the amount of
through- traffic entering the Tri- Valley.
Proposed Roadway Improvements
In order to accommodate buildout of the
General Plan, a wide range of street, highway,
and intersection improvements must be
constructed in a timely manner. Many
roadway improvements were installed prior to
development of major business parks in North
Pleasanton, resulting in the uncongested
Levels of Service in Pleasanton today.
Improvements must continue to be installed
prior to large amounts of residential and
employment growth, or congestion will result.
Figure 111- 5 illustrates roadway
improvements which need to be constructed
along critical roadway segments and at major
intersections. Existing configurations are
superimposed with needed improvements in
five- year increments. Projects approved for
or expected to have funding by Caltrans, the
City, or private developers are shown for
construction between 1995 and the year 2000.
Projects which will be needed sometime prior
to the year 2010 but which do not currently
have identified funding sources are shown for
construction from the year 2000 to 2005.
Projects which will take longer to develop or
fund are shown for the period 2005- 2010.
The policies and programs of the City support
the installation and financing of these
improvements by developers of new projects
as these are built. However, if development
is allowed to proceed in an area without these
improvements, congestion is likely to occur
beyond City standards. The City of
Pleasanton along with all jurisdictions within
the Tri- Valley are currently considering a
Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee5
to help defray the cost of needed
improvements.
Table In- 7 summarizes the roadway lane
configurations required to support full
development of the Planning Area. hlajor
road improvements which have not been
constructed include segments of El Charro
Road; Busch Road; Valley Avenue Extension:
Vallecitos Road/ State Route 84; Stoneridge
Drive Extension; Sunol Boulevard: Foothill
Road; and bridges at Bernal Avenue and
Arroyo del Valle, Bernal Avenue and Arroyo
de La Laguna, and First Street and Arroyo del
Valle.
In its original deliberations on the West Las
Positas Boulevard/ I- 680 interchange, the
1996 General Plan Steering Committee voted
to delete the interchange from the previous
General Plan Map. However, since this is a
very complex issue, the Steering Committee
subsequently voted instead to recommend that
a citizens advisory committee be appointed to
study and prepare a recommendation to the
City Council as to whether or not the City
should continue to plan for the construction of
the West Las Positas Boulevard/ I- 680
interchange. The Steering COmInittee felt that
this study should carefully examine all
potential impacts on the affected
neighborhoods, as well as on the overall
City- wide/ subregional traffic circulation
system. An economic and fiscal study should
also be included, as well as neighborhood
meetings.
111- 5
Proposed Traffic Management
Improvements
In order to make roadway improvements
effective, additional traffic mitigations should
be installed. Traffic signals, for example, are
a critical mechanism to ensure the safest and
most efficient flow of traffic. Figure III- 6
shows existing traffic signal locations and
those proposed to facilitate the free flow of
traffic at potentially congested intersections.
Traffic counts are another mechanism used by
the City to ensure that roadway improvements
are effective and traffic is flowing according
to projections. The City undertakes annual
traffic counts ( Figure 111- 2) on major arterial
and collector streets throughout the
community. Average daily traffic counts are
conducted at over 100 locations, and peak
hour turning movement counts are taken at
57 major intersections. These existing traffic
counts are then used as a basis for verifying
future traffic volumes and service levels
throughout the community. The City uses this
information to monitor traffic increases over
time and improvements in traffic flow caused
by roadway and other improvements. This
mformation also serves as the basis for
analyzing the traffic impacts of individual
development projects. The overriding purpose
of these traffic studies is to anticipate and
mitigate traffic congestion on City streets
according to adopted